






























































































































































































































































































































































GoipgiitN 0 ____ 


COPYRIGHT DEPOSm 

























WORLD CHAOS 
OR 

WORLD CHRISTIANITY 


Other Books by the Same Author 

Blind Spots 

Studies in the Cure of Race Prejudice 

The Ghost of Caesar Walks 

Christianity and Nationalism 

Christ’s Way and the World’s 
in Church, State and Society 

Co-Author of 

The Younger Churchmen Look at the Church 
The Church Through Half a Century 


WORLD CHAOS 
OR WORLD 
CHRISTIANITY 


A POPULAR INTERPRETATION OF 
OXFORD AND EDINBURGH 
1 9 3 7 


By HENRY SMITH LEIPER 

J M 



Willett, Clark & Company 

NEW YORK 

1937 


CD^'j ^ 


CHICAGO 




Copyright 1937 by 
WILLETT, CLARK & COMPANY 

Manufactured in The U. S. A. by The Plimpton Press 
Norwood, Mass.-LaPorte, Ind. 


©Cl A 115834 



CONTENTS 


Foreword 

Oxford and Edinburgh in London Town 
Oxford Listens 

Oxford Thinks Collectively — and Speaks 

Edinburgh Listens — and Thinks Collec¬ 
tively 

Edinburgh Speaks 
Oxford and Edinburgh Act 
























































































































































































FOREWORD 


many of the Christians of the world are aware, two 



highly representative councils of church delegates 
from forty-five countries — practically the whole of non- 
Roman Christianity — met at Oxford and Edinburgh in 
the British Isles during July and August, 1937. More than 
a solid month of meetings, with many subdivisions for the 
consideration of specific questions, produced a mass of ma¬ 
terial of which much deserves to be made permanent. As a 
matter of fact, the major findings and accounts of the gen¬ 
eral proceedings of both conferences are available. The 
present brief survey therefore is not intended to be exhaus¬ 
tive, or simply factual, or even chronological. It is only 
the attempt of one who was intimately connected with both 
conferences to describe their outstanding characteristics 
and to sum up his chief impressions of days spent in memo¬ 
rable fellowship with many men of many views who never¬ 
theless were — as the affirmation which crowned the work 
of the Edinburgh Conference asserts — “ conscious of a 
unity which is deeper than all their divisions/’ 

These words are being written on the Scotch Isle of Skye, 
which for variety and beauty of scenery is unrivaled any¬ 
where in the world. He who would attempt to describe it 
knows at the outset that nothing he can say will be ade¬ 
quate. His impression of the place is gained through his 
own limited faculties, and he remembers only what has 
imprinted itself deeply on his consciousness. He can take 
but one path at a time and even if he could make others 
see all its beauty he would know that he had missed many 
other paths equally beautiful and inspiring. 


Vll 


viii 


Foreword 


This is a symbol of some of the limitations of which I 
am acutely conscious as I set out to share with friends who 
did not have the privilege of attendance something of the 
inspiration and enlightenment which came to us all at 
Oxford and Edinburgh. If what is written here encourages 
any to further study of the actions of these great councils 
of the church, and leads, even to a small degree, to increased 
consciousness of world unity among the followers of our 
Lord — over against an ever more hostile world which 
presents rival claims to man’s supreme loyalty — I shall 
feel more than repaid for the effort involved in preparing 
the chapters that follow. 


Henry Smith Leiper 


WORLD CHAOS 
OR 

WORLD CHRISTIANITY 


I 


OXFORD AND EDINBURGH IN 
LONDON TOWN 


S tanding on the broad front steps of St. Paul’s Cathedral, 
London, early on the evening of July 29, 1937, I wit¬ 
nessed a scene which not even a hardened sightseer would 
soon forget. Up the slope from Ludgate Circus streamed a 
great company of people whose dress made it plain that they 
came from many nations. They were all bound toward the 
top of the hill, where for more than thirteen centuries a 
Christian church has stood. On every hand the sidewalks 
were thronged with curious crowds who watched quietly 
from every available vantage point. Handsome, courteous 
London “ bobbies ” kept order, but their task was an easy 
one, for the onlookers, though their interest was obvious, 
readily cleared a path for those who were on their way to the 
cathedral. Above the voices of the people rose the chim¬ 
ing of bells, ringing their changes under the hands of en¬ 
thusiastic English bellringers. 

A hush of expectancy, and all eyes turn toward the ap¬ 
proaching procession. First comes a coach magnificent in 
red lacquer and gold, in which ride the formal attendants 
of the Lord Mayor of London; then the Lord Mayor him¬ 
self, wearing his robes of office and sitting in his splendid 
state coach. The Prime Minister of England follows on 
foot, and after him march the leaders of the churches of 
forty-five lands, a company in colorful ecclesiastical cos¬ 
tume, in gowns and hoods and sashes fashioned after the 
tastes and traditions of all parts of the globe. 


2 World Chaos or World Christianity 

The ends of the earth are literally met together. The 
Japanese Bishop of Tokyo marches near the head of the 
group that represents the Russian Church in Exile. The 
head of the United Church of South India is to be seen 
along with the primates of the Church of England, the arch¬ 
bishops of Canterbury and York. The president of the 
Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America 
walks near the Archbishop of Thyateira. The chairman 
of the Evangelical Church Council of France leads the 
primates of Denmark and Sweden and a half dozen other 
lands whose churches are established by the state. The 
moderator of the United Church of Canada and other 
moderators of Presbyterian and Congregational churches 
all round the world are there, with Mar Shimun of the 
Ancient Assyrian Church and Mar Thoma of the Syrian 
Church in India. 

Bishop Perry of the Protestant Episcopal Church in 
America is one of a group from the New World. Near him 
walk the leaders of both the Northern and Southern Baptist 
conventions; of the Augustana Synod and of the United 
Lutheran Church; of the Methodists and of the Disciples; 
of the Friends and of the Old Catholic Communion. Dr. 
Timothy Tingfang Lew of Yenching University, a member 
of the legislative council of his nation, leads a company of 
eminent Chinese churchmen whose stature and attire con¬ 
trast with those of tall Dean Brilioth of the University of 
Lund in Sweden. Great missionaries march beside great 
laymen — men whose names are known around the world 
for their distinguished services in government and business 
— ambassadors, ministers of state, judges, educators, 
bankers, merchants, scientists and physicians. 

There are women too — Mrs. Fred S. Bennett, Mrs. 
Harper Sibley, Miss Dorothy Fosdick, Mrs. Harrie R. 


Oxford and Edinburgh in London Town 3 

Chamberlin, LL.D., Miss Eliza H. Kendrick, Ph.D., Miss 
Mary A. Dingman, Mrs. Henry Hill Pierce, Miss Anna V. 
Rice and Miss Ruth Woodsmall. The presence of women 
in such a formal ecclesiastical procession was in itself sig¬ 
nificant — although their small number seemed to support 
the mistaken idea that the church has no places at the top 
for members of the fair sex! 

The long procession winds across the central plaza and 
disappears into the cathedral, thronging the vast nave, the 
transept, the choir, the galleries, and presently overflowing 
through the doors. Within, the ushers are busy trying to 
find room for these thousands of worshipers. The ushers 
themselves are the youth delegates and official visitors 
to the two conferences. They have come from Algeria, 
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, 
China, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Estonia, France, Great 
Britain, Ireland, Greece, Holland, Hungary, India, Italy, 
Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Rumania, the 
Russian “ diaspora ” in exile. South Africa, Spain, Sweden, 
Switzerland, and the United States! 

For fifteen hundred years London has harbored ecclesi¬ 
astical gatherings, but never before had it watched so rep¬ 
resentative an assembly as this. And never before had 
Christians come from so many lands to worship on this 
site which was consecrated to the service of God in Christ 
eight hundred years before Columbus discovered America. 
I have been in hundreds of cathedrals and have attended 
festal services in at least a dozen parts of the world, but the 
throng that had come together in this huge church over¬ 
whelmed me. When they stood to sing Martin Luther’s 
hymn the sound was like “ rushing, mighty waters.” 

The service began. In the sanctuary leaders of various 
communions took part in the service, which led up to the 


4 World Chaos or World Christianity 

sermon preached by the venerable Archbishop of Canter¬ 
bury, Cosmo Lang. 

The archbishop took as his text these words: “ And the 
Lord said unto Moses: Wherefore criest thou? Speak unto 
the people that they go forward.” What he said was as 
memorable as the setting. When we are dismayed at our 
difficulties in trying to unite all branches of the Christian 
church, he said, we do well to remember that Moses came 
to know the certainty of God’s plan even when he could not 
see the way ahead. Our goal may be distant but the imme¬ 
diate road is plain and we must follow it steadily. No man 
who has seen the vision of a united Christendom can ever 
abandon the quest. Oxford has proved that our common 
Christianity is a great and inspiring reality capable of be¬ 
coming a mighty redeeming force in the chaotic world. 

Differences cannot be overcome by simply ignoring 
them; but if we build upon the central faith which we hold 
in common we will see these differences in their true pro¬ 
portion. Our growth into union is to be by way of unity; 
and such growth is really growth “ into Christ,” as Paul 
would have said. The source of unity is not the consenting 
movement of men’s wills but the eternal purpose of God. 
Just in proportion as we find in Christ our one center shall 
we grow into him and, as individuals or churches, grow 
together. In view of such a purpose — God’s and ours — 
delegates to such gatherings as those of Oxford and Edin¬ 
burgh must regard themselves not as recipients only but 
as trustees of a creative experience. 

In characterizing the trends in the ecumenical movement 
as a whole the archbishop declared two features note¬ 
worthy: the recognition of the place of common worship — 
since in worship men know themselves to be at one in 
prayer and in silence — and the new emphasis upon the 
importance of the church as the instrument of the kingdom. 


Oxford and Edinburgh in London Town 5 

The movement represented by the conferences of Oxford, 
Edinburgh and Hangchow (this last planned for 1938) is 
more important than any single manifestation of it — and 
the church as a whole has not yet realized how significant it 
is. We cannot doubt but that through it God is reuniting 
his broken church; and through such practical activity as 
is rendered possible by a council of the churches we are 
making ever more visible the unity which we hope some day 
to see consummated. 

As the aged primate finished there was a deep hush, 
more impressive and inspiring than any sound could have 
been. Then the organist began playing the familiar hymn, 
“ Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty! ” and the wor¬ 
shipers sang it, in many languages but with one spiritual 
voice. There followed an act of invocation led by the 
Indian Bishop of Dornakal, an act of penitence led by 
Archbishop Eidem of Sweden, an act of intercession led 
by Dr. Cockburn of the Church of Scotland, and an act of 
adoration led by the Eastern Orthodox Archbishop of Thy- 
ateira. Then came the Te Deum — sung like the hymn in 
many languages simultaneously — swelling in mighty 
chorus to the final lines, “ O Lord, let thy mercy lighten 
upon us as our trust is in thee. O Lord, in thee have I 
trusted: let me never be confounded.” 

As the long procession wound its way out of the cathedral 
into the early twilight of London I found myself asking 
questions and answering them as best I could. How and 
why were all these gathered here from the ends of the earth, 
obviously at great cost of time and money? And what was 
really their common interest? Their common interest, 
I felt sure after personal contact with them, was the unity 
of Christ’s church. Their common concern was lest its 
weakness in the face of the threats of its modern rivals be 
increased by its internal divisions. Their common objec- 


6 World Chaos or World Christianity 

tive, as the Archbishop of Canterbury had said, was to 
find the ways by which Christians of all kinds could work 
together, grow together, and ultimately achieve the re¬ 
union of Christendom in a church whose witness and 
work would, more nearly than ever in the past, approxi¬ 
mate the witness and incarnate the spirit of its common 
Lord. They had come to London, at the invitation of the 
archbishop and the Dean of St. Paul’s, to worship together 
and symbolize in one great public service something of the 
spirit and hope in which they had met and were again to 
meet in council. 

Although chronologically this service came after the Ox¬ 
ford Conference and before the Edinburgh Conference, 
there is good reason for beginning my account with it. The 
middle is often a good starting place: from it one can work 
both backward and forward. And in this case the link 
between these two parts of what is really one movement 
bears witness to that essential oneness. This was doubtless 
the last time these two bodies would meet as separate and 
autonomous entities, and so the service in St. Paul’s may 
well have been prophetic as well as symbolic. 

But what lay behind the calling of this meeting— what 
indeed is the movement of whose common interest and 
concern it was an evidence? In order to find the answer 
let us glance at Christian history both ancient and modern 
and recall certain relevant facts. 

“ I am the light of the world,” said Jesus to his followers. 
That is but one of the many sayings in which he implied 
that the whole world was the natural object of concern for 
those who came in contact with his universal spirit and 
tasted something of his experience of the all-inclusiveness 
of God’s love for mankind. Conscious of the inclusive 
character of the new faith, those who composed the church 



Oxford and Edinburgh in London Town 7 

during the early centuries formed the habit of appointing 
from time to time representatives who might gather to 
think and plan collectively for the difficult task which was 
theirs, namely, “ to make disciples of all nations.” These 
councils had a certain quality of which all those connected 
with them seem to have been aware; and the Greeks had 
a word for that quality: they called it “ ecumenical ” — 
that is, pertaining to the whole household of the faith, 
inter-racial, supra-national, supra-denominational, com¬ 
plete. Because of the strong sense which pervaded the early 
church of the importance of keeping Christianity undi¬ 
vided and ecumenical it was possible for observers to say 
that “ the Christians hold the world together.” 

This quality has been so little in evidence during recent 
centuries, particularly since the Reformation, that many 
Christians do not even understand the idea of the ecumeni¬ 
cal church. And of course they do not know or use the 
word which the Greeks used. Not that they have any other 
word; they haven’t, and they don’t feel the need of one 
just because they have so tragically missed the whole idea 
and have accepted as a matter of course the divided and 
scattered church whose racial, class, national and denomi¬ 
national lines cut back and forth across the world in every 
direction. 

Under the guidance of God’s Spirit the last thirty-odd 
years have witnessed, throughout the churches of the world, 
the gradual growth of a new desire for a truly ecumenical 
expression of the spirit of Christ in communion and fellow¬ 
ship. After strenuous efforts to overcome all manner of 
indifference and difficulty and in spite of repeated failures 
and discouragements, from 1900 on, with increasing fre¬ 
quency, there have been held in different parts of the world 
conferences that more and more approximated ecumenical 
representation and were drawn from the whole household 


8 World Chaos or World Christianity 

of the living church. Of these the most notable, from the 
point of view of creative impulse toward fuller unity, was 
held in Edinburgh in 1910 and dealt with the church’s 
mission to carry its witness to all mankind. Its conception 
of the churches’ collective responsibility for spreading 
the gospel led to the formation of the International Mis¬ 
sionary Council. The most widely representative con¬ 
ference and the first to bring the great Eastern Orthodox 
communion into touch with the Anglican and Reformed 
(Protestant) world in general was successfully called at 
Stockholm in 1925 after nine earlier attempts of the same 
sort had failed. The Stockholm Conference was concerned 
with unity in Christian life and work, the practical side of 
cooperation being considered more than the philosophical, 
theological or organizational sides. The most nearly offi¬ 
cial conference and the one most concerned with the actual 
unity of the church in its faith and organization — its 
“order” — was that held in 1927 at Lausanne, known as 
the World Conference on Faith and Order. It was sepa¬ 
rated by only a year from the conference in Jerusalem 
which carried forward the missionary task envisaged at 
Edinburgh. 

Here we have three bodies — the councils on missions, 
on life and work, and on faith and order — all partly 
ecumenical (none can be fully ecumenical which does not 
actually include the whole of the church throughout the 
world) and all so constituted as to be able to call world 
gatherings from time to time. But 1937 marked the first 
attempt of all three to plan together for something still 
more united and representative. It was, therefore, clearly 
not accidental that the two world conferences of 1937 met 
in the British Isles within one week of each other and 
held certain joint sessions in London. One of these con¬ 
ferences— that at Oxford — had to do with the church 


Oxford and Edinburgh in London Town 9 

in its relations to the state and the community or social 
order, and was called and managed by the body which had 
grown out of the Stockholm Conference, i.e., the Univer¬ 
sal Christian Council on Life and Work. The other — 
that at Edinburgh — was the second world conference on 
faith and order and it was planned by the continuation 
committee appointed at Lausanne. “ Life and Work ” was 
anxious to have — and secured to a degree hitherto un¬ 
known— the cooperation of other world-wide Christian 
organizations in preparing for the conference. Thus the 
International Missionary Council, the World Alliance for 
Friendship through the Churches, the World Alliance of 
Y.M.C.A.’s, the Y.W.C.A., and the World Student Chris¬ 
tian Federation, as well as “ Faith and Order,” all lent it 
assistance through their official staffs or otherwise. 

Attempts were made to secure the cooperation of the 
Roman Catholic Church for both Oxford and Edinburgh. 
Although in the view of the leaders of that communion it 
was not possible for them to take part directly in either 
conference, the state of the church throughout the world 
and the growth of a more Christlike attitude toward their 
“ separated brethren ” did lead them to cooperate in certain 
invisible ways with the Oxford Conference studies and to 
address a significant message, couched in terms of warm 
friendliness, to the Edinburgh Conference. Of this more 
will be said later. 

It is not my purpose here to review in detail the pre¬ 
paratory work for the conferences. But some understand¬ 
ing of the preparation is essential if one is to grasp the 
importance and significance of what happened. The pri¬ 
mary thing to be made clear is that neither conference was 
an event in itself, detached and complete. Both confer¬ 
ences were, as I have indicated, part of the general move¬ 
ment for greater Christian unity which I shall refer to 


io World Chaos or World Christianity 

hereafter as the “ ecumenical movement ” (and such it is 
as a matter of fact called by those most closely related to 
it, particularly in Europe). 

The conference at Lausanne had agreed upon a common 
statement of the church’s message to the world; it had made 
clear some of the major differences which keep the various 
communions apart; it had stimulated detailed study of 
possible reunion. Thus it had focused attention upon cer¬ 
tain subjects as the basis of further discussion. From year 
to year its continuation committee had met in Europe, 
formulating in considerable detail the plan of work for the 
1 937 conference. Four commissions had been formed, 
each centering in a different part of the world and engag¬ 
ing the particular attention of competent students. Here 
in the United States, for example, Dean Wilfred Sperry 
of Harvard Divinity School led a distinguished group of 
scholars in the preparation of materials for the study of 
the church’s unity in life and worship. Part of this work 
developed into a study written by Dr. Paul Douglass of 
New York, the most remarkable factual study yet produced 
of the many actual unions which have taken place all over 
the world between separate denominations. Incidentally 
it made very plain what were the practical things which 
could be done to promote and develop the desire for unity 
in advance of its actual consummation in organized life. 

The other three commissions had worked for years in 
preparing the ground for fruitful discussion of such divisive 
matters as views of the ministry and the sacraments, the 
doctrine of grace, and the meaning of “ word of God ” as 
used by the different branches of the church. Long before 
delegates were appointed to Edinburgh a whole shelfful 
of scholarly books had appeared as a result of the work done 
in various lands by these commissions. Their work may 
sound theoretical and abstract to the ordinary layman but 


Oxford and Edinburgh in London Town 11 

anyone can see that it is intimately related to the basic ideas 
which constitute the church and that no progress can be 
made on the formal side of reunion until such matters have 
been made clear and an understanding has been reached as 
to what should be taught concerning them in the church of 
the future. 

Perhaps I should point out here, as I did when presenting 
the opening statement at the Edinburgh Conference, that 
the place of theology in the life of the church can be ignored 
only at our peril. An illustration may help to make plainer 
why this is so. Suppose that a great bridge were to be built 
to connect two cities on opposite sides of a deep river. 
Bankers, real-estate men, traffic experts, river pilots, and 
politicians would all have to be consulted, as well as the 
engineers and designers. To discuss this work intelligently 
the engineers would have to agree on certain abstract prin¬ 
ciples of higher mathematics. All the stresses and strains, 
all the calculations of tensile strength, wind resistance and 
the like, depend upon certain applications of higher math¬ 
ematics. But the other people interested in the bridge 
would not be at all interested in higher mathematics — 
unless it be the bankers. The real-estate men, the pilots, 
the politicians and the others would perhaps urge the en¬ 
gineers to get down to something practical and leave off 
their theorizing. Yet the mere fact that the relevance of the 
higher mathematical theories did not appear to the non¬ 
engineers would not make these theories unimportant. 

Theology may not be exactly like higher mathematics, 
but it does represent the reflection of honest minds upon 
the mysteries of religious experience, and it does record 
their efforts to understand and explain as far as may be 
the facts of spiritual life and the laws of spiritual growth. 
That’s why I would say that just as a bridge between two 
cities cannot be built without higher mathematics, so the 


12 World Chaos or World Christianity 

bridge between the different communions cannot be made 
without theological understanding. 

And so it was that before the conference met in 1937 
all the delegates received advance reports summing up the 
work done in the theological field during the ten years 
following the Lausanne Conference. All could, and many 
did, study these with care before undertaking to discuss 
their revision or submission to the churches as a basis for 
advance toward union on the technical and organic side. 

I have spoken of the preparation for Edinburgh first 
because it actually began before the preparation for Ox¬ 
ford. Now let me describe briefly the process by which the 
program of the Oxford Conference was set up. World 
conditions in 1933 made it plain that a tremendous chal¬ 
lenge to the church was arising in the development of what 
is known as the totalitarian state — one in which every as¬ 
pect of life — ethical, educational, cultural, economic, as 
well as spiritual — is regarded as the direct concern of the 
political organization of the national state. The work of 
the research department of the Universal Christian Coun¬ 
cil after 1930 led directly to the consideration of this prob¬ 
lem which emerged simultaneously in different parts of the 
world. By 1933 it was obvious to thoughtful observers that 
the world was approaching one of the great turning points 
in history, comparable in significance to the great change 
which took place at the end of the Middle Ages and gave 
form to our modern world. The prodigious expansion of 
the state’s functions which had come about particularly as 
a result of the World War had made it necessary for every 
nation involved to control more and more of life. The new 
absolutism which ensued came to be recognized in Russia, 
Germany, Italy, Turkey, Mexico, and other lands as a 
definite if not always openly avowed substitute for the 


Oxford and Edinburgh in London Town 13 

Christian religion in the determination of ideals of both 
individual and collective conduct. 

In the attempt during this critical period to follow out 
lines of action in common, the churches, as represented in 
the Universal Christian Council for Life and Work, dis¬ 
covered that among all the questions which they faced none 
was more central or fundamental than that of their rela¬ 
tions with the modern state and with the secularized society 
from which the basic character of the state derives. Particu¬ 
lar point was given to this discovery by the situation con¬ 
fronting the Evangelical Church in Germany as a result of 
the deliberate attempt of National Socialism to prostitute 
that church to the purposes and ideals of a “ positive Chris¬ 
tianity ” which on inspection turns out to be no Christian¬ 
ity at all. 

Now, at the very moment when it realized how desperate 
was the need for common thought and action, ecumenical 
Christianity found itself deeply divided by differences of 
interpretation of its message and its task. Deeper in many 
cases than the supposed differences of denomination were 
those concerning the nature of God, his relationship to the 
world of men, his purpose for mankind, and the consequent 
basic ideals of human conduct. The critical nature of the 
struggle into which the churches were moving on many 
fronts made it necessary that these underlying differences 
be frankly faced — not to create an interesting debate on 
the floor of a council, but to arrive at vital truth and to gain 
new strength for battle against forces which, if victorious, 
would doom the church either to perish or to undergo such 
transformation as would make it only the ecclesiastical arm 
of some racial or nationalistic group intent upon objectives 
quite other than those of the kingdom of God. 

In 1934, at its meeting in Fan0, Denmark, the Universal 
Christian Council came to unanimous decision as to the 


14 World Chaos or World Christianity 

themes which should engage the representatives of the 
churches in a world conference on Christian life and work. 
Thanks to the generous hospitality of Oxford University, 
the place of the conference was later set in that famous town 
so closely linked with Christian history, and a distinguished 
son of Oxford, Dr. Joseph H. Oldham, long secretary of the 
International Missionary Council, was charged with the 
responsibility of planning and conducting the preliminary 
studies as well as the program to be followed in the confer¬ 
ence. 

In consultation with Christian leaders from many lands 
Dr. Oldham shortly decided on the main questions to be 
examined. These were, as I have suggested, determined 
not by abstract reasoning but by observing the actual trend 
of events in many parts of the Christian world. The con¬ 
crete situations implied definite points of view. They were 
obviously dependent upon certain ideas and convictions, 
upon a philosophy or “ ideology ” — in religious termi¬ 
nology, a “ theology.” The primary question usually was: 
What is man himself intended to be? By what principles 
and purposes is his conduct to be controlled? What does he 
live and die for? All theories of the state were seen to de¬ 
pend finally upon certain assumptions concerning the ori¬ 
gin and destiny, the nature and potentialities of man. And 
never has there been less agreement than at present con¬ 
cerning this basic question! Marxists say that man is 
wholly determined by the material forces of his environ¬ 
ment. Hitlerites avow that race, blood and soil are what 
matter most in his destiny. Behavioristic naturalistic phi¬ 
losophers teach that he is but part of the animal world, sub¬ 
ject wholly to elemental forces in instinct and impulse. 
Mussolini thunders his conviction that man derives the 
only significance he can have from his participation in 
the life of a nation. Humanistic philosophers now as in 


Oxford and Edinburgh in London Town 15 

the time of the Greeks find in man’s reason the guide to 
his nature and potentialities. 

Dr. Oldham and his associates therefore had to ask: “ Is 
there a Christian understanding of man distinguishable 
from all of these? Is man’s essential nature to be found in 
the fact that a word is addressed to him by a personal God, 
demanding from him a response, and thereby constituting 
him a person and calling him to a life of sonship and free¬ 
dom and fellowship and service in a community of per¬ 
sons? ” They were sure that the Christian church is com¬ 
mitted by its central affirmations to the belief that the life 
of man finds its expression in a community of persons. God 
has spoken to man the individual and to mankind in com¬ 
munity through his Son. “ He has revealed himself 
through his Word. The word — used in the widest sense 
to include every form of self-expression — is the means 
whereby persons communicate with persons.” Through 
our response to God’s word we become responsible persons, 
bound to our fellows and united with them in a community 
ruled by love. “ God bids us serve him as his free sons in 
the only way we can serve him—by ministering to the 
needs of our fellow men. What we do to them he accepts as 
done to himself. The love of God and the love of our 
neighbor are inseparable. . . . Therefore the church is the 
community of those who have been redeemed from a self- 
centered existence which is death, into the objectivity and 
freedom of a life of personal response to the demands of 
persons, a life of trust and loyalty, of faith and love.” 

Every doctrine that is clamoring for popular favor today 
Dr. Oldham and his fellow workers found to be directly or 
indirectly a denial of the essential Christian idea of man. 
Hitlerites deny it when they stress blood and soil and make 
man the product not of God’s eternal and universal purpose 
expressed from above but of blind primeval forces pushing 


16 World Chaos or World Christianity 

him up from below. Fascists deny it when they see men as 
only the atoms from which the nation is compounded. 
Communists deny it when they stress man’s primary need 
for economic goods and his determination by material 
forces. Freethinkers of the humanist type deny it when 
they demand for man, as an individual thought to be exist¬ 
ent in his own right, the opportunity to develop his own 
“ personality,” unrestrained by any common standards or 
by the bonds which unite him to his fellows. 

Almost as basic as the problem of the “ doctrine of man,” 
Dr. Oldham’s committee discovered, is the question 
whether and in what sense God is to be found in nature 
and in human history. In theological language this is the 
old problem of natural and revealed truth, or of the natural 
and the supernatural as contrasted in man’s experience. 
Connected with this, indeed growing out of it, is the ques¬ 
tion whether Christian experience is wholly spiritual and 
individual or whether it must find expression in material 
pursuits such as business and in society, both economic and 
political. There is food for thought in the fact that the 
church which has pressed most vigorously for the “ other¬ 
worldly ” or supernatural view of Christianity, namely the 
German Lutheran Church, finds its very existence chal¬ 
lenged by a government which accepts its own estimate of 
its mission. 

From this and other situations it became plainer than 
ever before that between man’s personal life as a follower 
of Christ and the requirements of those institutions in 
which he has to live — the family, the race, the community, 
the state, the economic order — there is never ending ten¬ 
sion. It is in this conflict, this opposition of forces, that the 
problems of what we call Christian social ethics arise. 

But no careful consideration of this tension and its mean¬ 
ing could fail to bring the thoughtful Christian face to face 


Oxford and Edinburgh in London Town 17 

with the question whether the ideal of the kingdom of God 
is wholly otherworldly or whether Jesus intended that it 
should find at least partial expression in the world of hu¬ 
man institutions. Again, is the kingdom something which 
is only given by God, something for which man should not 
and cannot hope to work? Or is the ideal to be actualized 
in the real through obedience and intelligence, in depend¬ 
ence upon God but likewise in reliance upon those powers 
which God has conferred upon man whom he has made “ in 
his own image ”? “ How are we to distinguish, on the other 
hand,” asked Dr. Oldham, “ between such an attitude of 
reliance upon God and not on human effort, and a supine, 
and therefore unchristian, acquiescence in things as they 
are, such as would justify the charge that religion is the 
opiate of the people and the chief hindrance to their attain¬ 
ment of a fuller life in this world? ” 

In the attempt to set many men of many minds through¬ 
out the churches of the world to studying such questions, 
Dr. Oldham and the other officers of the Universal Chris¬ 
tian Council traveled from nation to nation, organizing 
groups of students from various walks of life and from many 
communions. A surprisingly large amount of helpful and 
informative writing was the direct and indirect result of 
this effort. In fact, just before leaving the United States 
for Oxford, I placed all the new books which had to do with 
these subj ects on a shelf by themselves in my library. There 
were three feet of them! The important point is not that 
there were so many books — “of the making of books 
there is no end ” — but that a very large number of persons 
in more than a score of countries had been giving them¬ 
selves religiously to out-thinking the enemies of Christ, 
preparing the intellectual ammunition with which to wage 
the struggle all felt sure would become more and more 
acute. A further significant fact was that all of this work 


18 World Chaos or World Christianity 

had been but preparation for the world conference in Ox¬ 
ford which was intended in turn to facilitate study and ac¬ 
tion among Christian leaders working in harmonious unity 
of plan, if not of organization, in the days to come. An al¬ 
most equal number of volumes was available before the 
summer of 1937 as a result of preparations for the Edin¬ 
burgh Conference. 

Practical minds soon saw that if the church were to an¬ 
swer effectively the challenge of the modern age attention 
would have to be given not only to ideas but to organiza¬ 
tion. In consequence the bodies responsible for both the 
Oxford and the Edinburgh conferences appointed a com¬ 
mittee of thirty-five carefully chosen persons to study the 
organization of the ecumenical movement as a whole and 
make recommendations for its future development. This 
task involved the review of existing organizations — some 
seven or eight, possibly nine, all in some sense ecumenical 
in plan and objective. It also involved the preparation of 
recommendations which could win the support of Chris¬ 
tians from many nations and with very different church 
backgrounds. 

Along with the studies I have briefly described and the 
appointment of the committee of thirty-five under the 
chairmanship of the Archbishop of York, there went a proc¬ 
ess of selection and training of delegates which was of great 
importance. The administrative body of each conference 
sent out invitations to the churches of the world far in ad¬ 
vance of 1937 in order that the official bodies of the various 
communions might have time to consider carefully the se¬ 
lection of delegates. 

In the case of Faith and Order there were only to be dele¬ 
gates appointed directly by the churches. In the case of 
Life and Work, however, because of the nature of the task 


Oxford and Edinburgh in London Town 19 

to be undertaken, provision was made for the appointment 
of certain specially qualified persons from the central or¬ 
ganization of the Universal Christian Council. These were 
to constitute in all only one-fourth of the total membership 
of the conference. They came, of course, from many lands 
and from many communions and were men and women of 
definite and pronounced Christian conviction and connec¬ 
tion. Thus in the larger sense they all represented the 
church, if not the official ecclesiastical organization of the 
churches. 

That many individuals were appointed to represent their 
group at both conferences was inevitable; it was in fact de¬ 
sirable, since in this way the two main branches of the ecu¬ 
menical movement were more closely knit together than 
would otherwise have been possible. Most of these dele¬ 
gates came of course from the Western world, where the 
Christian religion has been longest established and where 
the sheer bulk of church membership is greatest; but much 
thought and care were taken to assure that there should be 
in both conferences an adequate if not numerous repre¬ 
sentation of the younger churches of the Eastern lands. 
As the event proved, those who came were both well 
equipped and willing to take an active part in the work 
which they felt was quite as important for them as for their 
brethren of the older churches. 

Thus was the ground prepared for the 1937 conference. 
We shall now look in at Oxford where the first of the two 
assembled. 


II 

OXFORD LISTENS 


N o one who knows Oxford need be told that it is an ideal 
town for a Christian conference. Twenty-one men’s 
and four women’s colleges maintain attractive and con¬ 
venient quarters. Sir Christopher Wren’s “ Sheldonian,” 
a curious circular assembly hall nearly three centuries old, 
which is used for all the great university functions, and the 
Town Hall, a modern structure, provide excellent facilities 
for large deliberative assemblies, St. Mary’s, for six hun¬ 
dred years the university church, and Christ Church Cathe¬ 
dral, dating from the twelfth century, can hardly be sur¬ 
passed as houses of worship. And these four buildings did 
in fact house all major meetings of the world conference 
which met there from July 12 to 26, 1937, although many 
other smaller churches and university buildings were used 
by special groups or commissions. 

The conference filled the Sheldonian twice on the open¬ 
ing day — once for a preliminary business session under 
the chairmanship of Dr. John R. Mott of New York, and 
again in the evening for the formal opening of the confer¬ 
ence under the chairmanship of Dr. Cosmo Lang, arch¬ 
bishop of Canterbury. In the earlier session, at which five 
delegates told what they anticipated of the Oxford Confer¬ 
ence, it was of particular interest to hear Miss van Asch van 
Wijck, president of the World’s Y.W.C.A., speak of her ex¬ 
pectation, shared she felt by Christian women in every 
land, of a new realization of the relevance of Christ’s teach¬ 
ing to the situation of the present day. Dr. Visser’t Hooft, 


20 


Oxford Listens 


21 


secretary of the World Student Christian Federation, upon 
being asked what youth expected of the conferences said 
that many alert young people hoped that Christian leaders 
who came to Oxford “ would present Christianity as salt 
and not as sugar! ” They felt, he said frankly, that the 
church is antiquated; and if they were Christian at all they 
wanted the reality of the fellowship of Christ’s followers as 
it is pictured in the New Testament. “ Let the church be 
truly the church of Christ and they will welcome it! ” he 
concluded, and his words met with prolonged applause. 

When the Archbishop of Canterbury spoke in the eve¬ 
ning he was introduced by Principal A. D. Lindsay of Bal- 
liol College, vice-chancellor of the university, acting for 
the chancellor, Lord Halifax, who was unexpectedly pre¬ 
vented from attending. On the circular benches — with¬ 
out backs and decidedly uncomfortable despite the fact that 
they are the seats of the mighty in Oxford — I noted that 
the archbishop was encircled, quite accidentally, by a cross 
section of the contemporary church universal. First there 
were Dr. John Baillie of Edinburgh and Bishop Azariah of 
Dornakal, South India; then Dr. Robert Hopkins, secretary 
of the World Sunday School Association, who sat between 
Dr. J. H. Oldham of London, secretary of the International 
Missionary Council and chairman of the research depart¬ 
ment of the Universal Christian Council, and Dr. Bertrand 
Stevens, Episcopal bishop of Los Angeles, California. 
Bishop Perry, who presided over the Episcopal House of 
Bishops in the United States, was seated between Dr. Wil¬ 
liam Temple, archbishop of York, and Dr. Marc Boegner 
of Paris, chairman of the French Federation of Churches. 
Then came Archbishop Germanos of Thyateira, represent¬ 
ing the ecumenical patriarch of the Eastern Orthodox 
Church; Reverend M. E. Aubrey, president of the Federal 
Council of the Free Churches in England; Dr. Ashton Old- 


22 World Chaos or World Christianity 

ham, Episcopal bishop of Albany, New York, and president 
of the American Council of the World Alliance for Friend¬ 
ship through the Churches; and Dr. Henry Sloan Coffin, 
president of Union Theological Seminary, New York. 
Close beside Dr. Coffin I saw Bishop R. C. Ransom of Ta- 
wawa Chimney Corner, Wilberforce, Ohio, head of the 
African Methodist Episcopal Church. He in turn was 
flanked by the Honorable Max Huber, former president of 
the International Tribunal at The Hague, and Frau 
Nathan Soderblom, widow of the late Archbishop of 
Sweden who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his 
part in the founding of the Universal Christian Council. 
Beside this charming lady, whom the assembly had honored 
earlier in the day on this the sixth anniversary of her hus¬ 
band’s death, sat her son-in-law, Dean Brilioth of the Uni¬ 
versity of Lund. In the next row appeared a no less repre¬ 
sentative group: Dr. William Adams Brown of New York, 
president of the Universal Christian Council and one of 
the chairmen of the Oxford Conference; Professor H. Ali- 
visatos of the Greek Orthodox Seminary in Athens; Wil¬ 
liam Paton of London, secretary of the International Mis¬ 
sionary Council and editor of the International Review of 
Missions; President John A. Mackay of Princeton Theo¬ 
logical Seminary; Dean H. P. Van Dusen of Union Semi¬ 
nary, New York; the Bishop of Chichester, England; and 
Father Bulgakoff of the Russian Orthodox Church in Paris, 
formerly a Communist, now a professor of economics. The 
last row, too, was varied and representative — Dr. Hans 
Schonfeld of Germany and Geneva, research director of 
the Universal Christian Council; Dr. Nils Ehrenstrom, his 
able Swedish colleague; Dr. Adolf Keller of Geneva, best- 
known of all ecumenical leaders; Dr. Allen Knight Chal¬ 
mers, pastor of the Broadway Tabernacle, New York; and 
Dr. Samuel McCrea Cavert, general secretary of the Fed- 


Oxford Listens 


23 

eral Council of the Churches of Christ in America. Last, 
but even more significant as showing the wide constitu¬ 
ency of the conference, I noted Dr. T. Z. Koo of China 
and Pastor Paul Nishida of Japan. The floor and the gal¬ 
leries of the queer old Sheldonian were filled to overflow¬ 
ing with these and a thousand more men and women from 
all but a few corners of the earth. 

There was one very noticeable absence of which the arch¬ 
bishop spoke with regret — that of the delegates of the Ger¬ 
man Evangelical Church. Pastor Martin Niemoller of 
Dahlem parish, Berlin, who should have been present as 
a speaker, was languishing in a nazi prison. Of the others 
who had been chosen to represent the German church 
several were, like him, prisoners of a government which 
more than any other save Russia’s in the modern world 
has sought to rid itself of the influence and ideals of the 
Christian religion. Those of the Confessional churchmen 
who were not under arrest had been deprived of their pass¬ 
ports; and the remaining representatives of Germany’s offi¬ 
cial church, while technically free to come, had been “ ad¬ 
vised” against coming by that government which on its 
rise to power had promised complete freedom and protec¬ 
tion to both Protestants and Catholics. 

Amid deep silence a telegram from the senior German 
Lutheran bishop, Dr. Marahrens, was read: “ I send you 
brotherly greetings and good wishes upon all your proceed¬ 
ings. May it be granted to your meeting to answer great 
fundamental questions in the light of the Word of God.” 
The conference at once voted to send a reply. I shall de¬ 
scribe in due course what happened in that connection, for 
it illustrates dramatically an important aspect of the present 
church-state struggle. 

Additional emphasis was given to the immediacy of the 
questions before the conference by the report of the re- 


24 World Chaos or World Christianity 

newed and bitter persecution by the Japanese government 
of Christians in Korea and Manchuria as well as in Japan 
itself. This persecution springs from the insistence of the 
militarists in control that the “ shrine ritual ” be made uni¬ 
versally compulsory — part of the deliberate attempt to 
make emperor worship the center of the religious life of 
Japan and of those unfortunate lands whose people she has 
subjugated. 

Against the dark background of these events the Arch¬ 
bishop of Canterbury described the reasons for which the 
conference had been brought into being. Referring spe¬ 
cifically to Russia, Turkey and Germany, and the difficul¬ 
ties encountered by Christians in these countries as a result 
of the exaltation of the state to a position of paramount 
importance, he said that the survey of the facts made in 
“ relentless honesty ” by the conference committee under 
the able direction of Dr. Oldham was almost if not entirely 
unique in showing how widespread are the claims of the 
state to control human personality. 

In view of this attitude on the part of the state, the 
archbishop continued, he hoped for a new interrelation to 
be established between Christian thought and action, pre¬ 
paring the way for a “ united supra-national Christianity ” 
which shall express itself through some permanent body 
recognized by all churches. The same relentless honesty 
is also needed in the presentation of the facts and the sug¬ 
gestion of possible responses to them. The church does 
not even understand the responsibility which lies upon it 
for asserting in the face of insistent denials its gospel of free¬ 
dom and fellowship. It must take united action to liberate 
the good in this day of the unprecedented, diffuse, and 
subtle evil masquerading as the savior of men and nations. 
Candid with respect to the shortcomings of the church, the 
archbishop asked, “ Can we speak without shame of the 


Oxford Listens 


25 

acceptance by Christianity of social conditions glaringly 
out of keeping with it? ” He pleaded with the delegates not 
to leave results “ in the air ” at Oxford. “ While the church 
is the bearer of light,” he warned, “ it depends on the indi¬ 
vidual member whether that light will be diffused in the 
world or hidden.” Individuals as well as organizations 
must lead the church, the community and the state nearer, 
if only by a few steps, to the holy city whose builder and 
maker is God. 

Thus the opening hours at Oxford were not given to 
vague generalizations; nor were the days which followed. 
Addresses by eminent churchmen from many parts of the 
world made at full sessions during the first four days cen¬ 
tered upon the major questions which confront the Chris¬ 
tian world. And the way in which these speakers handled 
their subjects showed plainly enough that they had not for¬ 
gotten the object of the conference — to combine faith and 
intelligence, to seek out agreements and define differences, 
to establish areas and methods of cooperation which would 
lend strength to the work of the individual church by re¬ 
lating it to the work of the church universal. No attempt 
to describe the conference would be complete without some 
report of these addresses. They were delivered in each 
case in the language of the speaker and a written transla¬ 
tion was prepared in advance for those members who spoke 
another language, so that it was unnecessary to translate 
each address as it was delivered. 

As was fitting, there came first a review of the progress of 
the ecumenical movement since the time of the Stockholm 
Conference. This was presented by Professor Runestam of 
Sweden, a son-in-law of Archbishop Soderblom, who was 
host to the 1925 conference and one of its principal found¬ 
ers. He noted the growth during these twelve years of 
those very dangers to the life of the church which had been 


26 


World Chaos or World Christianity 


in the consciousness of the founders of the movement; but 
when the six hundred representatives from thirty-seven na¬ 
tions gathered in Stockholm there had only begun to ap¬ 
pear (in Russia) the threat to the basic ideas of the Chris¬ 
tian religion which has since been so enormously and so 
variously increased in nation after nation. Professor Rune- 
stam, feeling that there was danger in placing too great 
emphasis upon thought alone, urged upon the Oxford Con¬ 
ference a renewed concern for action in unison. In the 
message of the Stockholm Conference he saw a basis of gen¬ 
eral agreement which could be regarded as having under¬ 
gone expansion and testing. All recognized, however, that 
this was but a beginning; and some, notably those who have 
come under the influence of the thought of Karl Barth and 
his school, consider it hardly the right beginning because 
of certain emphases which suggest that man and not God is 
chiefly responsible for the building of the kingdom, and 
also because they regard the kingdom as something to come 
not in this world but in the next. In his own personal ex¬ 
perience, Dr. Runestam said, the living supra-national, ecu¬ 
menical Christian community which at Stockholm was a 
distant vision had become a vital reality. That, he thought, 
— and all who have shared his experience will agree with 
him — is clear gain, not to be forgotten by those who have 
seen the many losses the world has sustained in these recent 
years of disillusionment. 

Dr. Oldham was given eager attention and prolonged ap¬ 
plause when he spoke on the meaning and possibilities of 
the Oxford Conference. He referred feelingly to the grim 
realities of unemployment and the resulting undernourish¬ 
ment and spiritual frustration. He pictured the inevitable 
consequences of the return to barbarism, a manifest char¬ 
acteristic of the day, and asked what relevance anything 
done at Oxford could have to a world which more than 


Oxford Listens 


27 

ever is an armed camp filled with hostile groups bent upon 
the destruction of any who threaten the accomplishment 
of their selfish purposes. Simply to urge the men and 
women living at such a time to “ be good ” is futile. What 
they need is knowledge of the great fact that through Christ 
they have received power to become the sons of God and 
fellow helpers toward the eternal truth which must find ex¬ 
pression in the community of the universal church. The 
question whether humanity will exterminate itself or climb 
to heights unimagined depends not on a declaration of new 
codes of action but on men’s becoming more and more 
earnest in their devotion to the one Lord in whose service 
there is a unifying principle and a dynamic power for both 
individual and social living. 

Dr. Hans Schonfeld, director of research for the Uni¬ 
versal Christian Council, described the world-wide work of 
preparation, an outline of which has already been given, 
and indicated as only a person of his unusual training and 
insight could the lines of Christian thinking which will be 
most likely to bring about effective and united action. He 
believes that in the right relationship, faith and intelli¬ 
gence can do more for the Christian world today than any 
two other qualities — faith in the purpose and power of 
God and intelligence in the use of the great gifts which 
God has given to man through Christ and the church. Be¬ 
ing a German with scholarly experience in social Christian 
activity in his own land before the rise of Hitler, Dr. Sch 5 n- 
feld is able, as not too many are, to grasp the complexity of 
the problem posed for the church by a state which itself 
seeks to become a substitute for the church. Since he now 
lives and works outside of Germany, Dr. Schonfeld enjoys 
a freedom such as none of his colleagues who must live and 
work inside the National Socialist state can any longer en¬ 
joy. Because of the emphasis which the totalitarian states 


28 World Chaos or World Christianity 

put upon a thoroughgoing ideology — winning by means 
of it millions of devoted and enthusiastic followers — it is 
clear, he thinks, that the church can expect to proceed only 
upon the basis of a genuine theology which is no less in¬ 
clusive and just as definite in its implications as is the 
thought structure of any new philosophy of power. To act 
first and think afterwards may satisfy the impatience of 
eager Christians, but it is no substitute for a fundamental 
conception of Christian activity which must win and hold 
the followers of Christ if they are to “ hold the world to¬ 
gether.” 

What Dr. Schonfeld had been doing in Geneva in prepa¬ 
ration for Oxford, Dean Van Dusen of the Union Theologi¬ 
cal Seminary, as secretary of the American advisory com¬ 
mittee on studies and program, had been doing in New 
York. He was therefore the natural selection of the busi¬ 
ness committee as the person to discuss the American ap¬ 
proach to the conference. He emphasized the expectancy 
and the perplexity of the American churches with respect 
to the problem of greater unity in Christian action, and 
went on to say that the transplanting of denominations to 
the United States brought with it every division existent 
in the Old World and, thanks to the inventive genius of 
the American, fostered a number of the new ones. Thus 
instead of having no church history — as is sometimes as¬ 
sumed to be the case — America has entirely too much. 
The numerousness of our transplanted churches and the 
variety of our denominations, Dean Van Dusen said, enable 
us to understand the history of the early church as it spread 
from the first motherland of Christianity, and lead us to 
believe that multiform expressions of the one faith can find 
federated more easily than organic unity. Certainly any 
unity which we in America can expect will proceed from 
a lack of uniformity or identity. Our idea, for example, of 


Oxford Listens 


29 

the church and state as correlative, each free from the con¬ 
trol of the other, is an indication of our refusal of the high 
authoritarian principle. American Christians however ex¬ 
pect from world-wide study of church-state relations clear, 
concise and commanding results which will apply every¬ 
where. We therefore must seek to bring to an ailing church 
a medicine for its needs, so that it may find the cure for a 
sick world. To fulfill this ministry, the dean added, three 
things are necessary: a message declaring in convincing 
form Christ’s truth for our harassed social order; persons 
as the channels through whom new life will flow; and an 
organized movement to provide a corporate instrument for 
the growing consciousness of existing Christian unity. 
These should be sought by the conference. 

Out of a wholly different background Professor Reinhold 
Niebuhr, a product of German Evangelicalism grafted into 
the stem of American Christianity, gave a characteristic 
“ torrential ” address in which he analyzed the deeper 
trends of the present day. He found the secret of the 
major tendency in the disavowal of the sacred which re¬ 
sults from the dominance of all forms of secularism. Secu¬ 
larism, he said, glorifies the subrational. Even when it ex¬ 
alts reason it does so apart from God; indeed rationalistic 
humanism is a kind of modern prodigal son. It asks for its 
share of the inheritance — freedom, autonomy — and 
spends it in riotous living, destroying universality and win¬ 
ning tribal anarchy. A mighty famine came upon it — 
the World War. It emerged ready to maintain itself by 
preparing to kill its neighbors with borrowed money. 
Christian civilization has been the elder brother to this 
prodigal. 

As a result of the failure of Christianity humanistic ra¬ 
tionalism has produced, or rather revitalized, nationalistic 
religions such as we see in Italy and Germany. Such reli- 


30 World Chaos or World Christianity 

gion is the quintessence of sin since it feeds on the self-glory 
of man and the denial of the universal God. But it arose 
partly in protest against the profane use of the sacred — a 
kind of “ taking the name of the Lord in vain/' which is a 
sin of much of Christianity. Through Catholicism Chris¬ 
tianity corrupted good religion into bad science and forced 
good science to appear as bad religion. The claim of a di¬ 
vinity attaching to the human organization of the church 
is another profanation. Many who have denied God have 
done so because those who claimed to represent him as¬ 
serted that they actually held him captive and profaned his 
image in suffering mankind. But the church cannot in¬ 
carnate God unless it is willing to go to the cross where su¬ 
premely the incarnation becomes convincing. Protestant¬ 
ism, on the other hand, has not given the impression of 
being willing to climb Calvary. It has been smug and com¬ 
fortable too often, profaning the sacred in its own peculiar 
way; it has itself tended toward secularism. 

The Christianity of Christ, Professor Niebuhr concluded, 
today implies the preaching of repentance to a world which, 
rejecting the church, seeks to make itself God. Repentance 
is the only gateway into the kingdom of God — which men 
can enter but which only God can establish. We must try 
to discover what would be fruits meet for repentance. We 
can at least be sure that they will be the product of life in ac¬ 
tion and not of faith only. We want and the world wants 
no Christianity which does not have confidence in the rele¬ 
vance of love to all of life. 

The last address of that first full day — and it was very 
full — was given by the Oriental secretary of the World 
Student Christian Federation, the brilliant, lovable and 
prophetic Dr. T. Z. Koo. I have known him and his work 
for fifteen years, beginning with the Peking Conference of 


Oxford Listens 


the federation in 1922, and have found in all the world 
few men who are his equals spiritually and intellectually. 
He began by saying that if the Christian West was just be¬ 
ginning to awaken to the dangers of secularist religion such 
as nationalism in its modern form, his own East, as a result 
of contact with the West, had long harbored a suspicion of 
this danger. The church’s failure in the East is only a part 
of its failure throughout the world to hold up its own 
spiritual standards before society. Society is now dictating 
its own standards to Christians. Nowhere is this reversal of 
authority more painfully apparent than in the racial atti¬ 
tudes which are common to most Westerners. Attempts at 
unity have failed not only because of differences of phi¬ 
losophy or of theology but also because of the denial by 
our divisions of the universality of Christianity. 

To the Eastern thinker culture is the web of attitudes 
and relationships which is woven around the three basic en¬ 
tities — God or heaven, the world, and man. If you know 
the fundamental ideas it holds concerning these three en¬ 
tities you know the fundamental culture of any people. In 
the West the trend of culture has clearly been to dethrone 
God as sovereign of life and to put man in his place. When 
that happens man loses what is certainly the only en¬ 
tity which in his heart of hearts he can regard as greater than 
himself. The frequent discussion in the Western world of 
the exchange of colonies as if they were commodities il¬ 
lustrates the loss of the sense of personality as a basic Chris¬ 
tian conception deriving from the common fatherhood of 
God. After dethroning God and exalting himself in God’s 
place, man has allowed the craving for material things and 
the fascination of creating them by the new techniques of 
science and art to subordinate all of life to material ends. 
Thus it is that everywhere man has made individual self- 


32 World Chaos or World Christianity 

interest rather than suffering love the ruling force in all 
of life’s relationships. 

It is because the church has been willing to accept for 
religion the status of one department of life among many, 
Dr. Koo asserted, that it has lost its hold on the true norm 
of appraisal for all life and social organization. When the 
church has made this surrender we must not be surprised if 
the state steps in and sets itself up as the ultimate organiz¬ 
ing center. Community, which men must have for social 
life, cannot exist without some organizing center. Even 
unthinking men sense the reality of this need and therefore 
accept what the new totalitarian states offer them without 
realizing why they accept it or at what ultimate cost. 

If you lose something the best way to find it is to search 
where you first missed it. The place where we must begin 
to search for our lost sense of the absolute sovereignty of 
God is the church, for it was there we first let it slip from 
the center of consciousness. But in looking backward we 
must beware of fixing our gaze too much upon the past 
with its mistakes; we must use the past as a springboard and 
not as a weight to hold us down. 

By the time Dr. Koo had finished his address the dele¬ 
gates were ready for the change from the mood of strenuous 
thinking to that of quiet common worship. And what an 
experience it was to go from the modern Town Hall, where 
the full sessions were held after the first hours in the Shel- 
donian, to ancient St. Mary’s Church! There for six cen¬ 
turies without interruption Christian worship has been 
held. The simple Gothic beauty of the nave with its clear 
windows and light gray stonework, the arrangement of the 
seating which enables a large congregation to feel a kind of 
intimacy ordinarily lacking in a church of like proportions, 
and the excellence of the acoustics which are aided by the 


Oxford Listens 


33 

skilled and unobtrusive application of modern radio am¬ 
plification — all worked together to provide a perfect set¬ 
ting for the hours of worship which began on that Tuesday 
afternoon at vespers and continued morning and evening 
throughout the conference. 

It would not serve the purposes of this brief account to 
describe these services in detail, but I shall try to give a 
general impression of the part they played in the life of the 
conference. There were among the delegates many who 
felt and said that they derived more inspiration from the 
common prayers at morning and evening than from any¬ 
thing else during their stay in Oxford. The remarkable 
attendance of delegates at these regularly recurring pe¬ 
riods of worship and intercession was in itself significant. 
Those who are familiar with great religious gatherings 
know only too well that in many instances “ devotions ” are 
regarded by a large number of the delegates as virtually 
free time; even if they do attend they expect nothing un¬ 
usual and — perhaps in consequence — get nothing. Not 
so at Oxford. In those periods of silence creative changes 
were taking place in the spiritual life of all, and the attend¬ 
ance, good from the first, grew rather than diminished as 
the days passed. The leadership was naturally diverse. 
The ritual forms used were those of all the great Christian 
traditions save that of Rome. But the pregnant silence of 
united prayer on the part of worshipers representing every 
stream of tradition and practically all the nations of the 
world is something which must be experienced to be under¬ 
stood. 

In one respect the worship services at Oxford were par¬ 
ticularly notable; they were so designed as to bring direct 
spiritual reinforcement to the intellectual and ethical ex¬ 
periences of the conference — another case of faith com¬ 
bined with intelligence! For example, on the afternoon of 


34 World Chaos or World Christianity 

the first Sunday Dr. Oldham led an interpretative service 
which translated the work of the conference into prayer. 
Intercession was first conducted with the church through¬ 
out the world in mind, each nation being mentioned by 
name. Three specific petitions characterized the prayers: 
first, that through the moving of God’s Spirit in the hearts 
of men there might take place throughout the world a re¬ 
lease of new energies, finding expression in a multitude of 
different centers in naturally varied forms of spontaneous 
activity; second, that the church everywhere might acquire 
a growing consciousness of its own true nature as an ecu¬ 
menical community; and third, that the eyes of Christians 
might be opened to recognize the truth to which the church 
is called to bear witness in the modern world and to the 
ways in which it is meant to serve God and man. These 
prayers for the church were followed by petitions for the 
guidance of God in the deliberations of the conference. 
At this point the chairman of each of the five sections stated 
what in the work of his section seemed most to call for 
prayer. In conclusion, the leader prayed that the grace and 
power of God might bring to living expression in the life 
of each member of the conference five things: first, a sense 
of their relation to him as creatures to the Creator; second, 
the spirit of penitence; third, the gift of forgiveness; fourth, 
the spirit of learning; and fifth, the spirit of confidence and 
hope. 

If you consider carefully the content of that typical hour 
of devotions at Oxford you will see how closely it fits the 
needs of all Christians everywhere, and likewise how much 
more definitely it relates to the living needs of the contem¬ 
porary Christian community than does many a service of 
prayer. It was but one admirable example of the manner 
in which the spiritual was linked with the practical. 

Yet nowhere else than during these hours of devotion 


Oxford Listens 


35 

was the tremendous difficulty of achieving Christian unity 
more clearly seen by those who were in a position to com¬ 
pare the attitudes of the different delegates. To those of 
the pronounced Protestant tradition much of the worship 
had a liturgical flavor which they found interesting but not 
convincing or helpful, while to the Anglo-Catholic and the 
Orthodox there appeared a dominant Protestantism which 
they felt ignored the riches of mystical communion as em¬ 
bodied in the elaborate liturgies of the ancient and undi¬ 
vided church. Indeed the reactions here were as striking 
and varied as were those to different presentations of Chris¬ 
tian viewpoints on the platform. One man, who like the 
majority greatly appreciated the statement of Dr. Niebuhr 
to which I referred a few pages back, said to another: 
“ There certainly could be no two opinions about that ad¬ 
dress! ” “ No,” said his friend, “ there could not indeed. 
It was terrible! ” 

What happened in the worship services was an illustra¬ 
tion of the extent to which, all unconsciously, we become 
creatures of habit. We grow up to think of some one form 
as the proper one, forgetting that it has had a long history 
and an intricate evolution from different forms which ante¬ 
dated it. Particularly in times of deep spiritual experience 
the unfamiliar seems the unreal. We are most of us at some 
point or other like the Connecticut farmer who objected 
to daylight saving time because, as he insisted, it was not 
“ God’s time ”! 

The net effect of the Oxford worship services however 
was distinctly on the helpful and inspiring side. Along 
with all the differences there emerged a deep sense of com¬ 
mon conviction and common dependence upon the one 
eternal Father in whom we all must live if we are to be true 
to our potentialities. Those services reached their high 
point in the communion on the last Sunday of the confer- 


36 World Chaos or World Christianity 

ence when all baptized members of Christian churches, 
“ whate’er their name or sign,” were invited to receive com¬ 
munion after the Anglican rite at the hands of the Arch¬ 
bishop of Canterbury. The memory of that hour will never 
fade from the minds of those who were present — that is, 
practically all the members of the conference excepting the 
youth delegates and associates who met for a similar service 
in St. Aldate’s Church where the Bishop of Chichester offi¬ 
ciated. At St. Mary’s one of the assistants to the archbishop 
in celebrating the communion was Dr. Azariah, Bishop of 
Dornakal, India. I saw my Congregational colleague and 
friend, Theodore C. Hume, pastor of the New England 
Church, Chicago, receiving communion at his hands. 
Knowing of his long connection with India — where his 
family for four generations has contributed mightily to the 
conversion of the nation to Christ— I asked Mr. Hume to 
give me a record of that experience. This is what he wrote: 

As I knelt at the communion rail in St. Mary’s, at the 
memorable morning service on July 25, I suddenly realized 
that something of far greater significance was taking place than 
a visible symbolizing of that increasing spirit of Christian unity 
that had marked our Oxford Conference. As I looked up into 
the face of Bishop Azariah of Dornakal, South India, who was 
administering the sacrament to me, the curtain of the years 
was drawn aside on a dramatic moment, probably known 
only to him and to me. It was the full rounding out of a cen¬ 
tury — perhaps the greatest century — of missionary expansion 
in the history of the Christian church. 

A sailing schooner, setting out from Salem, Massachusetts, in 
1839 to round the Cape of Good Hope, carried in its small 
group of passengers my great-grandfather, Robert Wilson 
Hume, one of the earliest missionaries of the American Board 
to India. He never returned to his native shores, for after a 
long life of service in proclaiming the Christian gospel in 
India he died at sea on the voyage back to America. Four 
generations of the Hume family have spanned the century as 
witnesses to the spirit of Christ in India, preaching, teaching 


Oxford Listens 


37 

and healing. And now, in this great service of dedication to 
the work of the world church, the cycle has come full round, 
and I am kneeling to receive the symbols of Christ’s living body 
from the hands of the first Indian bishop, a leader of that 
Christian church, the fruit of the “ missionary century ” now 
grown so strong in the intervening years. 

My imagination raced on, as I knelt in that brief moment, 
to include other divisions beyond those of geography alone. 
My forebears went to India in the name of the Congregational 
branch of the church of Christ, which I am happy yet to serve. 
How fitting that in the very year when significant efforts are 
being made to bring understanding and cooperation between 
the Episcopalian and Congregational churches of America I 
should be receiving the symbols of Christian unity from an 
Anglican bishop of India just as my great-grandparents went 
out in the free faith of their Congregational heritage. The 
“ younger churches ” of India and China have already made 
significant steps toward Christian unity. In this memorable 
service an Indian is, in a sense, returning the gift of the gospel 
with the added increment of a longing for unity that may, 
under God, in our time bear fruit of which we only dimly 
dream. 

What was the Indian bishop saying to me? “ The body of 
our Lord Jesus Christ. . . So indeed it had come to a new 
unity, transcending bounds of nation and race! 

And the bishop, be it added, came of an outcaste family! 

This account of the worship of the conference has been 
a digression from chronology. We must now go back and 
discover some of the further points of importance in the 
addresses made before the full sessions. These dealt not 
only with the significance of the church, its existence as an 
ecumenical society, its contemporary situation, and its rela¬ 
tionship to the world of which it forms a part, but likewise 
with the worth and dignity of man as the Christian church 
sees him, whether he be of the clergy or of the laity. 

With respect to the first of these themes it was essential 


38 World Chaos or World Christianity 

that the Protestant delegates secure some insight into the 
views of the ancient Eastern Orthodox Church. This in¬ 
sight was ably mediated by Professor Zankov of the great 
theological seminary in Sofia, Bulgaria, where I have had 
the pleasure of visiting him and observing his excellent 
work with the future leaders of his communion which, 
though it is little known to the Western church, numbers 
well over a hundred million. 

Professor Zankov stressed the necessity of holding in bal¬ 
ance two correlative truths. The first is that the church 
must proclaim God’s word and provide the means of medi¬ 
ating his grace to the individual as well as to society. The 
second is that the church must be the center of action based 
on this word and empowered by this grace. All genuine 
Christian faith must be expressed, incarnated in life. It 
must be visible in one’s relationship to the world and to 
one’s neighbor; for although an ascetic attitude of with¬ 
drawal from the world is an evangelical principle it is not 
the same as an escape from the world. To escape is to 
deny one’s Christian discipleship, to deny that our Lord 
when he became man truly entered into human history as 
its meaning and goal, to save, to overcome, to win and to 
bless the physical world. The Orthodox view is that he 
did thus enter into history. His incarnation has a cosmic 
significance. Through faith in that incarnation and 
through the power which it makes available in human life 
the Christian seeks to overcome the evil in the world as 
well as that which is within himself — so that the world, 
and he with it, may be set free for God’s high purposes. 

It follows from this approach that the mission of the 
church in relation to the family, the nation, the state, eco¬ 
nomic life, and all culture is to turn life toward the eternal 
values, ideals and aims which God intends. Yet this is not 
to say that the church is to take direct action in social and 


Oxford Listens 


39 

political spheres. It provides a basis of judgment upon 
them all. It views them and enables the individual to view 
them in the light of the principles of the gospel of Christ. 
Its effectiveness in shaping society depends upon the fact 
that all of human conduct reflects the driving forces of cer¬ 
tain attitudes of mind, the demonic and the divine. Here 
the church must fight its battle. It knows that the core of 
the demonic, the evil element in society, is the desire to be 
absolutely free from all restraint, wholly self-sufficient, sov¬ 
ereign. The secret of the kingdom of God, on the other 
hand, is the submission of the will of man to the will of God 
and a constant recognition of God’s supreme sovereignty. 

Thus the present world is involved in a tension such as 
has often existed in the past. It is not only a tension be¬ 
tween the demonic and the divine, but also between the 
experience of the cross and the experience of the resurrec¬ 
tion. It seems as if the Lord of history were once more 
setting the church universal in the situation of the early days 
in order that it may once more experience these tensions 
and confess Christ before the world even in martyrdom 
in order to win the world to saving faith. It is the very fact 
that so many Christians are unconscious of any tension or 
strain between the world and the kingdom of God that pro¬ 
vides evidence of the secularization of the church in our 
time. To the degree that it has become secularized the 
church may be said to have missed its true function. 

It was interesting to have this Eastern view followed by 
the presentation of one based upon wide experience in mis¬ 
sions throughout the world. An English Presbyterian, 
William Paton of London, editor of the International Re¬ 
view of Missions, said that the true meaning and function 
of the church is often easier to understand where church 
life and development are still simple or even primitive. 
In a typical village in India, China, or Africa, for example, 


40 World Chaos or World Christianity 

community life is carried on by Christians as a completely 
related and integrated activity — as part of the life of the 
church, which to them is not only a center of worship but 
also the means of education, medical help, rural advance, 
and cooperative credit, and sometimes of justice as well. 
Their Christian experience centers in the church and radi¬ 
ates to include the whole of common life. 

This is not, of course, true of the Western world. Many 
human activities once within the church have been pro¬ 
gressively secularized and thus the fellowship of the church 
has come to be regarded solely as having to do with wor¬ 
ship. As a society or community it is less real than a pro¬ 
fessional association or a trade union. Christian men in 
such a community may be troubled about what is the 
Christian way of acting in commercial relationships, but 
they have never learned to find help in such matters from 
other Christians within the church. This state of affairs is 
often accepted without question as if it represented prog¬ 
ress toward the kingdom of God when in actual fact it may 
easily denote widening separation from it. The reality of 
the church as a fellowship truer, deeper, more binding and 
more real than all others will not be believed or understood 
until it finds expression all over the world within the or¬ 
dinary social living of men. 

This tendency of the West to break the fellowship of the 
church by forgetting that the people of the East have the 
same personal rights as people anywhere is complicated by 
the prevalence of racial prejudice and discrimination. Mr. 
Paton, and later Professor Walter Horton of Oberlin, spoke 
with great clarity and force concerning the acid test which 
is presented to the church in the Pauline principle that in 
Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek — or, to use Mr. 
Paton’s rendering, “ neither Aryan nor Semite.” It was to 
me a peculiar coincidence that these solemn reminders of 


Oxford Listens 


4i 

one of Christianity’s greatest failures and clearest chal¬ 
lenges should have been uttered on the very spot where 
seven hundred years ago there stood a hostel for Hebrew 
Christians. 

In this connection there came before the conference a 
special message from the Conference on the Christian Ap¬ 
proach to the Jews held in Vienna, Austria, under the aus¬ 
pices of the International Missionary Council just prior to 
the Oxford Conference. This trenchant document calls 
anti-Semitism one of the “ principal denials in modern life 
of the Christian doctrine of man,” and declares that “ it is 
an attack upon the unity of the one holy and universal 
church; it is even a denial of the person of Christ himself.” 
The statement continues: 

It has been largely instrumental in aggravating existing eco¬ 
nomic and social strains until they have become intolerable. 
The human misery created, maintained, and at the same time 
concealed by the influence of anti-Semitism is difficult to esti¬ 
mate. Graver, however, than the volume of human misery is 
the poisoning of the spirit, the drying up of sympathy and the 
warping of judgment caused by the influence of anti-Semitism, 
especially among the young. 

The committee would further ask the conference to consider 
the terrible fact that this problem is not, like many the confer¬ 
ence will consider, that of an influence external to the Christian 
church with which it must make its account, but also of an evil 
within the church. Anti-Semitism antedates Christianity and 
it is not suggested that it is a purely Christian phenomenon, but 
it is aided by false Christian teaching and it results in the ap¬ 
palling situation present in several countries where Christian 
churches are reluctant, or frankly refuse, to receive a Jewish 
convert. It is plain that where racial and physical conditions 
of church membership override the conversion of heart and 
will the Christian religion has ceased to exist except in a vain 
form. But this devitalizing influence is present within the 
church, not only in one country but in many and far more 
widely than is suspected. 


42 World Chaos or World Christianity 

The committee therefore begs the Oxford Conference to 
speak out clearly on the dangers of anti-Semitism to the church 
itself and to recognize openly the total impossibility of a church 
tainted with this form of racial absolutism bearing any valid 
witness to the word of God in the world. 

Economic or interracial conditions can be changed only 
by great masses of Christians. Thus the thought of the 
conference was directed quite naturally to the question of 
the function of lay Christians within the church today. I 
heard it said — and I think with reason — that some of 
those who spoke of the function of the church were think¬ 
ing simply of the function of the ministry. It was pointed 
out, however, by Dr. Oldham and others that if Christian 
witness is to be effective in social and political life it must 
be through the action of the men and women who are con¬ 
cerned from day to day with the conduct of governmental 
administration, industry, and the multitudinous affairs of 
common life. We cannot afford to forget that Jesus was 
quite as much the Christ when he was a simple carpenter 
engaged in the common round of his lay duties as he was 
when he fulfilled his public ministry during the last three 
years of his brief life. 

That many have forgotten this fact was quite plain as 
one listened to the comments made by the “ high church ” 
type of delegate on the address of Dr. Justin Wroe Nixon 
of Rochester. Dr. Nixon sought to show what motives 
actually seem to operate in the lives of the individuals with 
whom the pastor comes in contact from week to week 
through participation in meetings of businessmen, in po¬ 
litical campaigns, educational associations, service clubs, 
boards of philanthropy, and recreation. He had observed, 
he said, three elements in the attitude of the ordinary lay¬ 
man toward the church. First, there is a consciousness of 
a higher moral order expressing itself in life. Second, there 


Oxford Listens 


43 

is a sense of superhuman power which is available to man. 
Third, these two elements are brought together in the con¬ 
cept of a God of love. It is Christ who brings all three into 
focus. The church must function in such a way as to ex¬ 
press the higher moral order and reveal the superhuman 
dimensions of life. It must emphasize the view that wher¬ 
ever you have people relating their lives consciously to 
Christ’s life and to the will of God as revealed in him, there 
you have a church. At the present time the major tests are 
to be met wherever people do not see the higher moral 
order — as for example in much of social and economic life. 
Thus the superhuman moral order expressive of God’s 
will is not even remotely sensed in our great corporations. 
Yet our world is too interdependent to exist without this 
sense of what Bishop Gore used to call “ the great human 
fellowship intended by Christ.” As former Prime Minister 
Baldwin reminded the youth of the British empire, every 
compromise with the higher moral order leads straight back 
to the jungle. We are seeing everywhere the truth of that 
observation. 

Therefore, said Dr. Nixon, the real crisis of the church 
today relates not primarily to its social program but to its 
faith. If that faith becomes clearer and is interpreted in 
its true implications for all of life the significance of the 
church will be reflected in the distinct difference between 
the consciousness of the lay Christian and the consciousness 
of those outside the church. God is calling us to a new in¬ 
ventiveness in expressing the divine nature within all hu¬ 
man institutions. This inventiveness must be of God and 
not of man — since no one can create the ideal fellowship 
of Christlike individuals save God alone. 

This same idea was expanded and applied by Dr. Old¬ 
ham when he pointed out that our thought about the 
church and its functions has become greatly confused 


44 World Chaos or World Christianity 

through failure to recognize with sufficient clearness that 
the church must be regarded from two points of view. On 
the one hand it is a society organized for worship, preach¬ 
ing, teaching, and spiritual nurture. As such it is distinct 
from all other associations, whether economic, political, or 
cultural. On the other hand the church is a society of men 
and women who have been given a new understanding of 
life and have undergone a change which modifies their 
whole outlook and behavior and should color their every 
action. The first rather than the second of these views 
tends to dominate our thinking and consequently to deter¬ 
mine and limit our practice. Because this double aspect 
of the church has been lost from view our conception of it 
has become clericalized in the thinking of both clergy and 
laity. This attitude often keeps us from seeing clearly our 
real problems. When we think of the relation of the 
church to the economic or social order we tend to think 
mainly or exclusively of what the church can do in its cor¬ 
porate capacity. We limit ourselves to the question. What 
influence can be brought to bear upon society from without? 
Such limitation is fatal. Really important changes can be 
brought about only from within. The conduct of public 
life, of government, and of industry involves a multitude 
of decisions from day to day by countless individuals, and 
there can be no deep change except by the progressive 
transformation of the insights and motives which prompt 
these decisions. 

In consequence. Dr. Oldham concluded, the church must 
avoid two mistakes: it must not limit its conception of what 
it can and ought to do in the social and political spheres to 
what it can do appropriately and effectively in its corporate 
capacity; and it must not insist — however much truth there 
be in that belief — that it is not the business of the church 
as an organized society to interfere in politics or business, 


Oxford Listens 


45 

and then remain content with this disclaimer of responsi¬ 
bility. It must recognize that the permeation of social life 
with Christian motives can be brought about only by the 
action of those who participate in the conduct of affairs. 
They can and should discharge this Christian responsibil¬ 
ity as members of the church, nourished by its tradition, 
preaching and sacraments, instructed by its teaching and 
supported by its fellowship and prayers. In order to do 
this they need a kind of help which is not at present being 
given them, a kind of help which must arise from new 
thinking and the discovery of new types of ministry. To 
think new thoughts and discover new ministries is one of 
the distinct responsibilities of Oxford. 

It was quite logical to move from such considerations to 
the question of what constitutes the basis of the Christian 
ethic or moral standard. This question was approached in 
two very different ways by Professor Emil Brunner of 
Switzerland and by Dr. Matthews, dean of St. Paul’s Cathe¬ 
dral, London. Dr. Brunner, like M. Maury of France, 
maintained the view that the Christian ethic is not to be 
identified with the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as 
interpreted by Tolstoy or in the social gospel. When so in¬ 
terpreted it becomes a legalistic thing, a system which ex¬ 
hausts its energies in making demands without mobilizing 
or creating the moral force to carry them out. Nothing is to 
be gained by demanding that I love my enemies. What is 
needed is the power to help me do it. This power is made 
available only through complete union with Christ, as Paul 
pictured it, and results in freedom from all laws, programs, 
schemes, or ethical principles. 

Therefore, argued Dr. Brunner, it is not the business of 
the church to lay down any program or to establish any sys¬ 
tem. It is even to be doubted whether the church should 
speak of an ethic at all — since an ethic is conceived of as 


46 World Chaos or World Christianity 

having independent and enduring existence, as laying down 
rules for all of life. To the Christian the good is intelligible 
and possible only in connection with divine action. The 
knowledge of what God is and does connects itself indi- 
visibly with obedience to his commands. One cannot exist 
apart from the other. Yet the church has cut this tie; it has 
set up dogmas which have no obvious relation to action and 
an ethical scheme which is separated from faith in God’s 
saving act of redemption. Faith which is not at the same 
time obedience is not only incomplete but actually harm¬ 
ful, just as action which does not spring from faith is sinful. 

Hence it appears, thinks Brunner, that a Christian ethic 
true to Christ is far more concerned with persons than with 
institutions, programs or systems. First of all the poisoned 
sources of conduct must be cleansed in order that conduct 
may be pure. The world needs primarily not new institu¬ 
tions but new men and women. This point of view is per¬ 
sonalism. But it must not be confused with individualism. 
True faith indeed is the very opposite of individualism; it 
means being incorporated into the body of Christ, becom¬ 
ing one with him and with his will. Therefore the most 
personal kind of faith involves the most universal kind of 
service. Christ lived and lives to serve his Father and the 
world of men. So personal categories replace for the Chris¬ 
tian all systems and legalistic principles. At the same time, 
however, Christian faith and personal regeneration do 
change institutions as nothing else can. Thus a new spirit 
in society and among nations can come into being. A 
major responsibility of the church is to bring into being 
this spirit and set on foot these changes through acceptance 
of God’s free gift in Christ, the Saviour of both individuals 
and society. 

To the Dean of St. Paul’s the Sermon on the Mount and 
the summary of the law as given us by our Lord are the 


Oxford Listens 


47 

very principles of the kingdom of God. The conception of 
the good, whether personal or social, remains an empty 
thing until it is filled with the moral values derived from 
the gospel. This conception is not simply the fruit of natu¬ 
ral evolution; it is revealed to us in Christ and is the gift of 
God. The kingdom is therefore not of man but of God; it 
looks not for an earthly utopia but for ultimate consumma¬ 
tion in the unseen world. To be sure, its principles can¬ 
not be applied directly to life in the actual world of human 
relationships while that world is organized on principles 
which are a direct contradiction of the kingdom ideal, but 
the Christian has the duty of adjusting his conduct so that 
it approximates as closely as possible to that ideal. He has 
also the advantage of a standard by which he may measure 
social as well as individual progress toward the good. Ad¬ 
vance for the Christian signifies an approach toward a so¬ 
cial order in which all persons would have opportunity of 
development in accordance with God’s purpose. In that 
order all relations would be such as those described in the 
Sermon on the Mount. 

The difference which here emerged between Dr. Brun¬ 
ner and Dr. Matthews is important to grasp because it was 
one of those basic differences which ran all through the 
conference and which are expressed in the Christianity of 
our time. The Continental view tends to be like that of 
Dr. Brunner, while the Anglo-Saxon and American view is 
much more like that of Dr. Matthews. The way of com¬ 
pletely reconciling them has not yet been found, but that 
there are grounds of hope for mutual understanding will 
appear in the account of the subsequent actions of the 
Oxford Conference itself. 

The last formal addresses of the conference — the major 
part of which was not addresses but group thinking which 
I shall describe in detail later on — were on the theme of 


48 World Chaos or World Christianity 

the ecumenical nature of the church and its responsibility 
toward the world. England, France, America, and Japan 
contributed the speakers. Mr. T. S. Eliot, the English poet, 
agreed with the others in declaring that the ecumenical na¬ 
ture of the church is today largely absent in fact. Our forms 
of worship, our theology, our organized life, have all been 
split up by two great forces among many. The first of these 
forces is nation-race-language, the second is class or social 
status — self-evident both. But the way to overcome the 
divergencies which they have caused is not clear. Many 
generations of Christians have done their thinking, and 
especially their theological thinking, very largely in the 
compartments of nation and class. The communions in 
not knowing one another have ceased truly to know or un¬ 
derstand themselves. Their present interest in finding out 
more about one another is a very hopeful sign, for in learn¬ 
ing more about others each will learn more about itself. 
Mr. Eliot expressed the belief that through this process we 
shall come to value at their true worth — that is, as inci¬ 
dental and not primary—such things as national and 
racial differences. We shall also see local and national ways 
of feeling and acting in their real character — right enough 
perhaps in themselves, but harmful if they are accepted as 
an integral part of Christian faith. 

I have already referred to part of Pastor Pierre Maury’s 
address. Dr. Maury maintained that the ecumenical nature 
of the church is determined solely by its relationship to 
Christ, and that we must insist on loyalty to Christ as the 
sole standard of reference and final court of appeal for all 
Christians. What loyalty to him may imply is not to be 
determined, however, apart from history. For in each mo¬ 
ment of time there are sure to be particular ways in which 
the individual and the church should serve the will of the 
universal God. 


Oxford Listens 


49 

The final American speaker, Dr. Samuel McCrea Cavert, 
general secretary of the Federal Council of the Churches 
of Christ, pointed out that because of the failure of the 
average Christian to realize that as a member of the church 
he is a member of a world community there is no true ecu¬ 
menical consciousness today. The predominant loyalty of 
the average church member is to a local congregation or 
at most to a national denomination. Because he lacks 
vision of the church as a fellowship so vital as to transcend 
the ordinary barriers which separate men, it does not seem 
to him to stand for community in the widest sense at all. 
Therefore it does not seem strong or significant enough to 
command a wide allegiance. The average man does not 
see in the church the force that might unify civilization and 
save it from disintegration. It does not in fact unify or 
integrate, for example, even the divided and often hostile 
race and class groups in America; nor do American Chris¬ 
tians usually feel that they have more in common with their 
fellow Christians in Japan or Germany or Russia than with 
their fellow Americans who do not share the Christian view 
of life. 

The church can come to stand as an effective foe of war 
— as well as of lesser evils which threaten the world — only 
when it binds its members into such a solid whole as to 
make it unthinkable for them to take up arms against one 
another or to disregard the family ties which link them to 
a common heavenly Father. Dr. Cavert referred, as had 
the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dean Van Dusen and 
others, to the need of some organization which would link 
together the churches of the world as they have not been 
linked these many centuries and thus begin the slow process 
of regaining the lost sense of world fellowship. 

A note of great poignancy and dramatic power was intro¬ 
duced with the presentation by the Reverend Chukichi 


50 World Chaos or World Christianity 

Yasuda of Kyoto of the problem of Christianity and nation¬ 
alism in Japan. Although his comments were necessarily 
reserved it was sufficiently plain that to him as to so many 
others in the contemporary world the problem of church 
and state, of conflicting loyalties contending for man’s su¬ 
preme allegiance, was anything but theoretical. Although 
the cult of emperor worship is steadily gaining in Japan, 
Mr. Yasuda said, the government still officially asserts that 
the required shrine ceremony is not worship but only 
reverence before the symbols of national power incarnated 
in the person of the emperor. We all felt as we listened 
that what the future holds in store for the Christians of 
Japan no one can say. But their struggle is clearly going to 
be more and more serious, and many fear that martyrdom 
awaits those who fearlessly put Christ first and refuse to 
bow their necks to that reincarnation of Caesarism which 
a horror-struck world now witnesses in the Land of the 
Rising Sun. 


Ill 


OXFORD THINKS COLLECTIVELY 
— AND SPEAKS 

r first, as every conference inevitably must, Oxford 



Jr\ listened. The story of what it heard I have tried to 
tell very briefly. After listening for four days, it took five 
or six to think and discuss. That is the story of the second 
and creative stage of the conference. 

What happened during these strenuous days of collective 
thinking is difficult to describe. The delegates broke up 
into five main sections to deal with the five main themes 
of the conference, and subdivided for special study during 
a number of days. Perhaps before mentioning the themes 
I should explain how each was subjected to the process of 
collective thinking by representatives of widely different 
points of view. 

As I have already related, for more than three years be¬ 
fore the Oxford Conference met a continuous interchange 
of thought was carried on under the direction of Dr. Old¬ 
ham and his colleagues in the Universal Christian Council. 
More than a hundred significant contributions on the 
themes of the conference were secured from leading think¬ 
ers. These contributions were circulated in three lan¬ 
guages among a much larger group of scholars for correc¬ 
tion, revision and comment. At least four hundred persons, 
among them the ablest minds in the Christian church, took 
part in this preparatory study. Much of the fruit of this 
process was available to the leaders of the conference sec¬ 
tions as well as to the delegates who desired to study it — 
and many did so desire. 


51 


52 World Chaos or World Christianity 

When the sections met therefore they were not counting 
simply on the general information of their individual 
members, nor on the facts presented in the opening ad¬ 
dresses. Moreover, a preliminary draft on the subject of 
each section had been prepared by the chairman and various 
persons chosen to represent different communions and view¬ 
points. These drafts had been given in advance to all dele¬ 
gates and provided an excellent starting point for discus¬ 
sion. That little of them appears in the final reports does 
not mean that they did not serve their purpose of focusing 
discussion at the outset. They were — to use Dr. Koo’s 
simile — springboards and not weights. 

These were the five themes: 

I. Church and Community 

II. Church and State 

III. Church, Community and State in Relation to the 
Economic Order 

IV. Church, Community and State in Relation to 
Education 

V. The Universal Church and the World of Nations 

The respective chairmen of these sections were Sir Wal¬ 
ter Moberly of Great Britain, chairman of the Universities 
Grants Commission; Honorable Max Huber, Swiss jurist, 
formerly president of the Court of International Justice at 
The Hague; Principal John Maud of University College, 
Oxford, economist; President Henry Sloan Coffin of Union 
Theological Seminary, New York, educator and theologian; 
and President John A. Mackay of Princeton Theological 
Seminary, missionary, administrator, author and educator. 
Associated with them were secretaries for each commission 
or section, and these were chosen from different nations and 
different communions. In the case of Section V there was 
a subsection on war headed by Dr. Visser’t Hooft, originally 
of Holland, now of Geneva, secretary of the World Student 
Christian Federation. 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 53 

The sections concerned with each of the main subjects 
met at the same period during four full morning sessions 
and four evening sessions. A smaller drafting committee, 
composed of from ten to fifteen persons representative of 
the churches throughout the world, was elected for each sec¬ 
tion. These committees worked almost every free hour dur¬ 
ing the last ten days of the conference. As Dr. Oldham 
points out, “ the actual writing of the reports was the work 
of these committees, but what they wrote was the product of 
minds stimulated and fed by the discussion in the sections. 
The reports are not simply the work of a few individuals but 
the result of genuine group thinking. The plan of break¬ 
ing up the conference into sections containing about eighty 
members and of appointing smaller drafting committees 
had the advantage of providing every member of the con¬ 
ference with the opportunity of contributing to its thought 
and at the same time of distributing the responsibility for 
its productive work among as many as fifty or sixty of its 
members.” The plan worked; it was an amazing piece of 
ecumenical cooperation which could not “just happen” 
but which had to be planned and executed with the great¬ 
est care and foresight. That it met with almost unanimous 
approval is hardly surprising. 

It might be thought that a great deal of time was con¬ 
sumed in making translations in each section, but this mat¬ 
ter was handled very cleverly. Since the bulk of the dele¬ 
gates understood English there were only relatively small 
groups for whom translations in French and German were 
necessary. Each of these assembled around an expert trans¬ 
lator in a sort of “ huddle ” and as the discussion proceeded 
the gist of it was given them so that they could partici¬ 
pate. What they said in their own language was quickly 
translated into English for the benefit of those who did not 
understand French or German. It was gratifying to watch 
the working of this system. The delay occasioned by the 


54 World Chaos or World Christianity 

results of what happened at the old tower of Babel was 
really inconsequential. 

After each section had completed the various stages of its 
work its findings were reported before a general session of 
the conference by the chairman of the section. Full discus¬ 
sion and comment followed, the first draft was rewritten 
where necessary, and the report was finally accepted by the 
conference in the form which represented the combined 
judgment of all. 

A detailed story of all that went on in the sections and 
subsections would be very long indeed. No one person 
could write it, since the discussions proceeded simultane¬ 
ously. What I shall try to do, however, is to give a brief 
picture of what went on in Section V, in which I was en¬ 
rolled. We met in St. Columbo’s Presbyterian Church just 
off High street. In my many years of conference experience 
all over the world I have never seen quite so impressive and 
representative a group of men struggle with a major prob¬ 
lem of the church. As I looked around the first day, while 
Dr. Mackay was explaining the process which would govern 
our sessions, I noted in the group the following distin¬ 
guished men: * Dr. John R. Mott; the Archbishop of 
York; Archbishop Germanos of the Eastern Orthodox 
Church; Dr. William P. Merrill, pastor of Brick Presby¬ 
terian Church, New York, and president of the World Alli¬ 
ance for International Friendship through the Churches; 
Dr. Otto Piper, formerly of Germany whence he was ex¬ 
pelled by the nazis, now professor in Wales; Dr. T. Z. Koo 
of China; Dr. T. T. Lew, also of China, dean of the theo¬ 
logical faculty of Yen Ching University; Dr. Adolf Keller 
of Geneva, author, pastor, professor, ecumenical leader par 

* This is a very formidable list of names, but only by including it can I 
convey an impression of the diversity and caliber of that company. 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 55 

excellence; Dr. A. L. Warnshuis, formerly of China and 
London, now New York secretary of the International 
Missionary Council; Dr. Samuel McCrea Cavert of New 
York; Dr. Walter W. Van Kirk, director of the National 
Peace Conference in the United States; President George 
Richards of Lancaster Theological Seminary, moderator 
of the Reformed and Evangelical Church, U. S. A.; Dr. 
E. S. Tittle of the Methodist Church, Evanston, Illinois; 
Dr. Theodore A. Greene of New Britain, Connecticut, 
Congregational leader; Reverend Theodore C. Hume, pas¬ 
tor, Chicago, Illinois, and leader of peace activities of the 
Chicago Church Federation; Dr. W. H. Drummond, long 
a secretary of the World Alliance for International Peace 
and a resident of Oxford; Lord Robert Cecil of Chelwood, 
one of the founders of the League of Nations; Dr. Sieg- 
mund-Schultze, former court preacher to the German kai¬ 
ser, editor and author, in exile for his convictions, and now 
residing in Switzerland; Miss Mary Dingman, head of the 
Women’s International Peace Committee in Geneva; Dr. 
Edward L. Cross, pastor, president of the Congregational 
Home Board in the U. S. A.; Pastor Pierre Maury of 
France, prominent leader of the evangelical churches; 
Philip Carr, Lord Lothian, former secretary to the prime 
minister of Great Britain, author and expert on interna¬ 
tional affairs; Canon Raven of the Anglican Church in 
England; Richard Roberts, D. D., moderator of the United 
Church of Canada, pastor and author; Sir Alfred Zimmern 
of Oxford and Geneva, noted lecturer; Dr. Allen Knight 
Chalmers, pastor of Broadway Tabernacle Church, New 
York; Dr. Robert M. Hopkins, general secretary of the 
World Sunday School Association; Frau Soderblom, widow 
of the former primate of Sweden; Pastor Henry Louis 
Henriod of Geneva, general secretary of the Universal 
Christian Council; Honorable John Foster Dulles of New 


56 World Chaos or World Christianity 

York, lawyer; Dr. Joseph H. Oldham of London, research 
chairman of the Universal Christian Council and secretary 
of the International Missionary Council; Dr. Henry A. 
Atkinson, secretary of the Church Peace Union, New York; 
Reverend William Paton, London, secretary of the Inter¬ 
national Missionary Council; Dr. Visser ’t Hooft; Mr. 
J. V. Wilson of the Secretariat of the League of Nations; 
and fifty others — men and women of distinction from all 
over the world! Even those I have just named represent a 
dozen nations and more than twenty denominations. 

You might expect such a group to disagree; you might 
also consider anything upon which they could agree to be 
of quite unusual weight and significance. There were 
hours of discussion in that section which added greatly to 
the comprehension and insight of all who participated, no 
matter what their former experience. I well recall that 
soon after the conference I was speaking with Lord Lothian 
about his own impression. “ It was,” he said, “ one of the 
most encouraging and surprising revelations of the fact that 
the churches realize their potential power in world affairs. 
There can be no question that the only way to peace is the 
way of Christ. But until Christians generally see what 
those Christians at Oxford saw, and act accordingly, there 
can be no fellowship across national lines which will stand 
the strain of modern conditions.” What he felt was not 
very different from what certain distinguished lay repre¬ 
sentatives from America felt. “ It was the most stimulating 
intellectual and spiritual experience of my life,” said Mr. 
Charles Taft with regard to the discussions in the section 
of which he was a member. 

To say these things to you who were not there is not, 
I realize, particularly convincing. You naturally wish to 
know something of the method followed and the results 
achieved. The results you can get in concrete and definite 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 57 

form in the reports of the sections as they were finally pre¬ 
sented to and accepted by the conference. The methods I 
shall try to describe in sufficient detail to give you a clear 
understanding of them. 

We began in Section V with a review of the international 
situation facing the church. Dr. Koo and Dr. Lew from 
China gave it terrific and challenging force by reminding 
us that as we sat there talking war was breaking out in their 
homeland. “ My wife is in Tokyo and my little twelve year 
old daughter is in Peking. I do not know whether I shall 
ever see them again,” said Dr. Lew. He went on to explain 
that he could get no word from them, and that his feeling 
toward Japan was naturally conditioned by his fears on 
their behalf. Yet during those tense days the Japanese 
and Chinese delegates took afternoon tea together and 
discussed the problems which they both faced as Christians 
in a world of war. Right there in our own circle we were 
witnessing the power of Christianity to bring together those 
who were being driven apart by every force of nationalism 
and race difference. 

Dr. Koo told of the meetings of Chinese and Japanese 
after the Shanghai battle of several years ago and said that 
he had come to hold a view of the relationship between the 
church universal and the world of nations which was the 
product of that experience and which had cost him dear. 
The creative part of our work at Oxford, he reminded us, 
must not be to analyze world conditions but to help us as 
Christians to determine what we ought to say and do. 
“ You have to live a kind of life which will resolve the inter¬ 
national situation for you in such a manner that the by¬ 
product of peace is yielded.” To do this involved for him 
two things: living a life in which he specifically learned to 
love his enemy (“ My Japanese enemy is sitting on my door¬ 
step in China waiting for me to love him! ” he said, with a 


58 World Chaos or World Christianity 

wistful hint of a smile on his expressive and noble face), 
and interweaving through all of life’s relationships some 
higher loyalty which can embrace them all. Recognizing 
the fact that we might be mistaken he urged us to “ take the 
risk of being wrong on the side of the unity of humanity.” 

We cannot live and work for a vacuum. The mere ab¬ 
sence of war is a vacuum. The definite thing to work for 
is the kind of organization which will make the bonds of 
peace strong enough to overcome the causes of war. We 
live in a world of sin, but it is also a world in which Christ’s 
great act of redemption has taken place. That is as much 
a fact as the world’s sin. To be realists we must keep both 
facts in view. While conscious of sin we can likewise be 
conscious of the power given followers of Christ to incarnate 
his love and make it effective in all human relationships. 
Does this mean pacifism? Dr. Koo replied: “ If the ulti¬ 
mate end of my loyalty is my family, I will fight. If my 
loyalty is to my nation as the final reality, I will fight. But 
for myself as a Christian I abjure the personal or national 
use of armed force. I can contemplate its use only by 
some truly international body which wields it as a police 
force under law. If the churches wish to be realistic about 
peace they will defend and strengthen the League of Na¬ 
tions, favor the honest application of sanctions, and help to 
create an international police force to see that they are 
not violated. Without some such process disarmament 
is an absolutely impossible dream in a world of sin and 
selfishness.” 

This general view was supported by Lord Cecil, Lord 
Lothian, Mr. Wilson, and a number of others who, as 
Christians, have been very close to the league in its de¬ 
velopment from the idealistic angle. Mr. J. V. Wilson, ob¬ 
server from the secretariat of the League of Nations, sug¬ 
gested that readers of the section’s report would welcome 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 59 

the fact that the Christian attitude toward the league had 
been directly and concretely examined. The report should 
enable the Christian to see the league in a just perspective 
as a machine which requires certain forces to set it in mo¬ 
tion. “ Like the community and the state,” Mr. Wilson 
said, “ the international order will be profoundly affected 
if in fact the powerful leaven of Christian impulse works in 
the ways you have chosen. May it be said,” he concluded, 
“ that the planes of ecumenical Christianity and ecumeni¬ 
cal politics, most distinct though they are, meet in the 
summons to ‘ keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of 
peace/ ” 

When many in the group protested that the league had 
failed to accomplish those purposes which had won it 
such wide church support these men replied that the na¬ 
tions which compose the league had certainly failed, but 
that we have yet to see what a league composed of nations 
really committed to the cause of peace could accomplish. 
Such a league, they felt, should be part of the program of 
enlightened Christians, and while the church as an institu¬ 
tion is not called upon to promote it its members ought to 
do so in their private capacity as citizens. 

Sir Alfred Zimmern pointed out that mechanization has 
enabled the gospel, often seemingly driven by the devil, 
to travel around the world. If we are to wait until the 
whole world is Christian and everyone in it dominated by 
Christlike impulses we shall wait forever. The league is 
plainly a secular good, not a spiritual one. But it is the 
best which man can devise in an unchristianized world. 
The specific task of the church in relation to the interna¬ 
tional order is, as he sees it, that of making economic inter¬ 
dependence— which is a fact — human interdependence 
— which is not yet a fact — in the consciousness of man¬ 
kind. Wherever there is an export of capital there a Chris- 


60 World Chaos or World Christianity 

tian duty is created. We cannot, in other words, forget 
that economic forces are back of war and that they can be 
controlled. If we were too optimistic about their control 
ten years ago it seems evident that we are too pessimistic 
now. The church cannot afford to take a defeatist atti¬ 
tude, nor should it allow the Christian as a citizen to 
take it. 

Honorable John Foster Dulles of New York followed up 
this statement with another in which he said that if the 
so-called Christian nations had given to Germany under 
Chancellor Bruening one-tenth of what Germany has taken 
under Chancellor Hitler we should not have ruthless dicta¬ 
torship in Germany. We ought to work as Christians to 
remove the idea that it is ever too late to talk about justice 
and to try to do justice. There is too much concern in 
the contemporary world for law and order and not enough 
for right and justice. The church too often allies itself 
with the former and neglects the latter. It says in effect 
to the rich young ruler, “ Give me part of what you have 
and I will help you to keep the rest through the support of 
law and order — contractual relations! ” We should, Mr. 
Dulles declared, lean over backwards in standing for right 
and justice rather than stand simply for an old established 
order based on laws which often enshrine injustice. We 
must see that moral conditions are created under which we 
can say that force has lost its sanction; and the right of 
resort to force loses moral sanction only when there has 
been established some machinery for securing justice. 
Only in this way can we look forward to ridding the world 
of war. 

Canon Raven took a strong stand in opposition to what 
had been said by all those who thought force could ever 
be contemplated without complete condemnation. The 
church, he felt, had been distorted by the end of the third 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 61 

century. The church which dares to be Christian today 
will doubtless be a martyr church, but it will be called upon 
to choose the way of martyrdom in loyalty to its Lord. 

Lord Lothian interjected that he regarded the mind of 
Christ as the most penetrating and devastating of all re¬ 
forming forces, yet not as being political in any sense. 
Christ’s mind is our only rock; on it alone can true reform 
of the international situation be founded. His mind has 
been responsible through his church for most of the things 
we treasure. Christianity when it is true to him is dynamic 
and productive. Yet, even so, it is hardly to be expected 
that Christians will be able to speak with one voice regard¬ 
ing any specific reform. Christ reveals himself to indi¬ 
viduals in many different ways. We have therefore to dis¬ 
tinguish between the church as the means of transmitting 
the Christian message and the church as an originator of 
the means for applying that message. Clearly God has, 
through the church, thrown down a challenge to war. 
When we achieve an ecumenical church in the place of the 
divided church we now have, we shall not differ so much 
as to how God’s will for the nations is to be interpreted. 
National sovereignty is itself a denial of the Christian ideal. 
The state which insists on being sovereign cannot put right 
and justice first; security is its only norm. Christianity 
must challenge the idea of national sovereignty but not 
expect it to yield instantly. However, until we realize that 
the federal principle is basic, and until we limit national 
sovereignty, we cannot expect to have a world of nations 
living at peace. 

There was much more to the discussion — a very great 
deal more. But what I have here set down gives a fair idea 
of its trends. Out of it came the appointment of a drafting 
committee consisting of the two chairmen — President 


62 World Chaos or World Christianity 

Mackay and Dr. ’t Hooft — Secretary Paton, Professor Zim- 
mern, Mr. Dulles, Professor Alexis, the Archbishop of 
York, Pastor Maury, Dr. T. Z. Koo and Dr. Walter W. Van 
Kirk. Three Americans, three Englishmen, one Dutch¬ 
man, one Frenchman, one Russian and one Chinese; the 
Church of England, the Reformed Church of Holland, 
the Protestant Episcopal Church, the French Reformed 
Church, the United Church of China, and the Methodist 
Church — a pretty representative cross section of nationali¬ 
ties and creeds whichever way you look at it. This com¬ 
mittee drew up a report and brought what it had written 
before all the section members for criticism and revision 
before the final draft was made. 

On Monday, July 19, Dr. Mackay presented the report 
to the full conference and received numerous suggestions 
and criticisms. In the light of these the report was again 
revised and given the form in which it has now been laid 
before the churches of the world. It should be read by 
every intelligent Christian who cares about world peace, 
and it will form the basis of much study and action in the 
years to come. Since it is, even in its brief form, twenty 
pages long, I shall include an outline of it along with brief 
summaries of the other sectional reports. 

The same general process was followed in each of the 
other sections. One got the impression that, in each, strong 
spiritual as well as intellectual tides were flowing. At first 
everything seemed chaotic — differences were so acute and 
viewpoints so varied. Always there was the language diffi¬ 
culty, of which I have spoken; but deeper down were the 
differences in psychological and cultural viewpoints. I 
well remember that in one case an intimate colleague of 
mine was asked to draft an important statement for one of 
the sections. He did so, using what I suppose we would 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 63 

call “ American English.” When his Continental and 
British friends told him what his statement meant to them 
he was dismayed to find that they were reading into it ideas 
which had not even remotely entered his mind when he 
prepared it. Such difficulties of course were bound to ap¬ 
pear. The contrast between the Western and the Eastern 
Christian showed itself repeatedly and could never be 
wholly overcome. That any progress from chaos toward 
creative agreement was possible seemed at times a miracle. 
Yet that miracle took place. None who witnessed it could 
escape the conviction that God’s hand was in it, his power 
behind it, his will expressed through it. 

Thus did creative collective thought bring the confer¬ 
ence to the point where it was ready to speak with convic¬ 
tion, unanimity, and convincing moral authority derived 
not from ecclesiastical organization but from the spirit of 
the Living God. 

We shall now inquire into what it spoke. 

Since the most careful and authentic summary of the 
findings of the Oxford Conference on Church, State and 
Society — or Church, Community and State, if we use the 
British title — is given in the message it issued to the Chris¬ 
tian churches it represented, I shall begin with that mes¬ 
sage. The official text follows: 

The delegates to the World Conference on Church, Com¬ 
munity and State, assembled at Oxford from July 12 to 26, 
1937, send at the close of their deliberations the following 
message to the Churches of Christ throughout the world: — 

In the name of Christ, greetings. 

We meet at a time when mankind is oppressed with 
perplexity and fear. Men are burdened with evils almost 
insupportable and with problems apparently insoluble. 


64 World Chaos or World Christianity 

Even in countries which are at peace unemployment and 
malnutrition sap men’s strength of body, mind and spirit. 
In other countries war does its “ devil’s work,” and threat¬ 
ens to overwhelm us all in its limitless catastrophe. 

Yet we do not take up our task as bewildered citizens of 
our several nations, asking if anywhere there is a clue to our 
problems; we take it up as Christians, to whom is com¬ 
mitted “ the word of reconciliation,” that “ God was in 
Christ reconciling the world unto himself.” 

The first duty of the church, and its greatest service to the 
world, is that it be in very deed the church — confessing the 
true faith, committed to the fulfillment of the will of 
Christ, its only Lord, and united in him in a fellowship of 
love and service. 

We do not call the world to be like ourselves, for we are 
already too like the world. Only as we ourselves repent, 
both as individuals and as corporate bodies, can the church 
call men to repentance. The call to ourselves and to the 
world is to Christ. 

Despite our unfaithfulness God has done great things 
through his church. One of the greatest is this, that, not¬ 
withstanding the tragedy of our divisions and our inability 
in many important matters to speak with a united voice, 
there exists an actual world-fellowship. Our unity in Christ 
is not a theme for aspiration; it is an experienced fact. We 
can speak of it with boldness because our conference is an 
illustration of it. We are drawn from many nations and 
from many different communions, from churches with 
centuries of history behind them and from the younger 
churches whose story covers but a few decades; but we are 
one in Christ. 

The unity of this fellowship is not built up from its con¬ 
stituent parts, like a federation of different states. It con¬ 
sists in the sovereignty and redeeming acts of its one Lord. 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 65 

The source of unity is not the consenting movement of 
men’s wills; it is Jesus Christ whose one life flows through 
the body and subdues the many wills to his. 

The Christian sees distinctions of race as part of God’s 
purpose to enrich mankind with a diversity of gifts. 
Against racial pride or race antagonism the church must 
set its face implacably as rebellion against God. Especially 
in its own life and worship there can be no place for bar¬ 
riers because of race or color. Similarly the Christian 
accepts national communities as part of God’s purpose to 
enrich and diversify human life. Every man is called of 
God to serve his fellows in the community to which he 
belongs. But national egotism tending to the suppression 
of other nationalities or of minorities is, no less than in¬ 
dividual egotism, a sin against the Creator of all peoples 
and races. The deification of nation, race or class, or of 
political or cultural ideals, is idolatry, and can lead only 
to increasing division and disaster. 

On every side we see men seeking for a life of fellowship 
in which they experience their dependence on one another. 
But because community is sought on a wrong basis, the 
intensity of the search for it issues in conflict and disinte¬ 
gration. In such a world the church is called to be in its 
own life that fellowship which binds men together in their 
common dependence on God and overleaps all barriers of 
social status, race or nationality. 

In consonance with its nature as true community, the 
church will call the nations to order their lives as members 
of the one family of God. The universal church, surveying 
the nations of the world, in every one of which it is now 
planted and rooted, must pronounce a condemnation of 
war unqualified and unrestricted. War can occur only as 
a fruit and manifestation of sin. This truth is unaffected 
by any question of what may be the duty of a nation which 


66 World Chaos or World Christianity 

has to choose between entry upon war and a course which 
it believes to be a betrayal of right, or what may be the duty 
of a Christian citizen whose country is involved in war. 
The condemnation of war stands, and also the obligation 
to seek the way of freeing mankind from its physical, moral 
and spiritual ravages. If war breaks out, then preemi¬ 
nently the church must manifestly be the church, still 
united as the one body of Christ, though the nations 
wherein it is planted fight one another, consciously offering 
the same prayers that God’s name may be hallowed, his 
kingdom come, and his will be done in both, or all, the 
warring nations. This fellowship of prayer must at all 
costs remain unbroken. The church must also hold to¬ 
gether in one spiritual fellowship those of its members who 
take different views concerning their duty as Christian 
citizens in time of war. 

To condemn war is not enough. Many situations con¬ 
ceal the fact of conflict under the guise of outward peace. 
Christians must do all in their power to promote among the 
nations justice and peaceful cooperation, and the means of 
peaceful adjustment to altering conditions. Especially 
should Christians in more fortunate countries press the 
demand for justice on behalf of the less fortunate. The 
insistence upon justice must express itself in a demand for 
such mitigation of the sovereignty of national states as is 
involved in the abandonment by each of the claim to be 
judge in its own cause. 

We recognize the state as being in its own sphere the 
highest authority. It has the God-given aim in that sphere 
to uphold law and order and to minister to the life of its 
people. But as all authority is from God, the state stands 
under his judgment. God is himself the source of justice, 
of which the state is not lord but servant. The Christian 
can acknowledge no ultimate authority but God; his loyalty 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 67 

to the state is part of his loyalty to God and must never 
usurp the place of that primary and only absolute 
loyalty. 

The church has duties laid upon it by God which at all 
cost it must perform, among which the chief is to pro¬ 
claim the word of God and to make disciples, and to order 
its own life in the power of the Spirit dwelling in it. Be¬ 
cause this is its duty it must do it, whether or not the state 
consents; and the state on its side should recognize the duty 
and assure full liberty for its performance. The church 
can claim such liberty for itself only as it is also concerned 
for the rights and liberties of others. 

In the economic sphere the first duty of the church is to 
insist that economic activities, like every other department 
of human life, stand under the judgment of Christ. The 
existence of economic classes presents a barrier to human 
fellowship which cannot be tolerated by the Christian 
conscience. Indefensible inequalities of opportunity in 
regard to education, leisure and health continue to prevail. 
The ordering of economic life has tended to enhance 
acquisitiveness and to set up a false standard of economic 
and social success. The only forms of employment open to 
many men and women, or the fact that none is open, 
prevent them from finding a sense of Christian vocation in 
their daily life. 

We are witnessing new movements which have arisen in 
reaction to these evils but which combine with their strug¬ 
gle for social justice the repudiation of all religious faith. 
Aware of the reality of sin, the church knows that no change 
in the outward ordering of life can of itself eradicate social 
evil. The church therefore cannot surrender to the uto¬ 
pian expectations of these movements, and their godlessness 
it must unequivocally reject; but in doing so it must recog¬ 
nize that Christians in their blindness to the challenging 


68 World Chaos or World Christianity 

evils of the economic order have been partly responsible for 
the antireligious character of these movements. 

Christians have a double duty — both to bear witness to 
their faith within the existing economic order and also to 
test all economic institutions in the light of their under¬ 
standing of God’s will. The forces of evil against which 
Christians have to contend are found not only in the hearts 
of men as individuals, but have entered into and infected 
the structure of society, and there also must be combated. 
The responsibility of the church is to insist on the true 
relationship of spiritual and economic goods. Man cannot 
live without bread, and man cannot live by bread alone. 
Our human wealth consists in fellowship with God and in 
him with our brethren. To this fellowship the whole 
economic order must be made subservient. 

The questions which have mainly engaged the attention 
of the conference are questions that can be effectively dealt 
with, in practice, only by the laity. Those who are re¬ 
sponsible for the daily conduct of industry, administration 
and public life must discover for themselves what is the 
right decision in an endless variety of concrete situations. 
If they are to receive the help they need in making respon¬ 
sible Christian decisions new types of ministry will have to 
be developed by the church. 

The fulfillment of the tasks to which the church is called 
today lies largely in the hands of youth. Many loud voices 
are calling on young people to give themselves to political 
and social ideals, and it is often hard for them to hear the 
voice of Jesus Christ who calls them to be servants of the 
eternal kingdom. Yet many of the younger generation, 
often in spite of ridicule and sometimes of persecution, are 
turning to him, and individually as well as in Christian 
youth movements devote themselves to the renewal of the 
life of the churches and to making known the good news 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 69 

of Christ by word and action. We rejoice in their brave 
witness. 

In the education of youth the church has a twofold task. 
First, it must be eager to secure for every citizen the fullest 
possible opportunity for the development of the gifts that 
God has bestowed on him. In particular, the church must 
condemn inequality of educational opportunity as a main 
obstacle to fullness of fellowship in the life of the com¬ 
munity. 

While the church is thus concerned with all education it 
has, also, a special responsibility to realize its own under¬ 
standing of the meaning and end of education in the re¬ 
lation of life to God. In education, as elsewhere, if God is 
not recognized he is ignored. The church must claim the 
liberty to give a Christian education to its own children. 
It is in the field of education that the conflict between 
Christian faith and non-Christian conceptions of the ends 
of life, between the church and an all-embracing com¬ 
munity life which claims to be the source and goal of every 
human activity, is in many parts of the world most acute. 
In this conflict all is at stake, and the church must gird 
itself for the struggle. 

As we look to the future it is our hope and prayer that the 
Spirit of God may cause new life to break forth spontane¬ 
ously in a multitude of different centers, and that there 
may come into being a large number of “ cells ” of Chris¬ 
tian men and women associated in small groups for the 
discovery of fresh ways in which they may serve God and 
their fellow men. 

We have deeply felt the absence from our fellowship of 
the churches that have not been represented at the con¬ 
ference. Our hearts are filled with anguish as we remem¬ 
ber the suffering of the church in Russia. Our sympathy 
and gratitude go out to our Christian brethren in Ger- 


70 World Chaos or World Christianity 

many; we are moved to a more living trust by their stead¬ 
fast witness to Christ and we pray that we may be given 
grace to bear the same clear witness to the Lord. 

We have much to encourage us since the conference at 
Stockholm twelve years ago. The sense of the unity of the 
church in all the world grows stronger every year. We 
trust that this cause will be yet more fully served by the 
world council of churches, proposals for which have been 
considered by the conference and commended to the 
churches. 

We have tried during these days at Oxford to look with¬ 
out illusion at the chaos and disintegration of the world, 
the injustices of the social order and the menace and horror 
of war. The world is anxious and bewildered and full of 
pain and fear. We are troubled, yet we do not despair. 
Our hope is anchored in the living God. In Christ, and in 
the union of man with God and of man with man, which 
he creates, life even in face of all these evils has a meaning. 
In his name we set our hands as the servants of God, and in 
him of one another, to the task of proclaiming God’s 
message of redemption, of living as his children and of 
combating injustice, cruelty and hate. The church can be 
of good cheer; it hears its Lord saying, “ I have overcome 
the world.” 

In addition to this general message the conference, in 
view of the absence of any representatives of that great body 
of Christians, addressed a special message to the German 
Evangelical Church. In presenting the proposal of his spe¬ 
cial committee for a message and a draft text thereof the 
Bishop of Chichester, Dr. Bell, referred with feeling to the 
many difficulties through which Germany has passed dur¬ 
ing the last nineteen years. We cannot, he said, forget the 
mistakes — and more than mistakes — of which the victo- 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 71 

rious powers were guilty. “ How deeply one regrets that 
the opportunities then existing for a kindlier, a humaner, 
settlement of European affairs were not met in a generous 
imaginative way by all the powers with whom the responsi¬ 
bility lay.” He called attention to the efforts made in Ger¬ 
many itself for the reshaping of her life and indicated that 
all Christians outside Germany should do everything pos¬ 
sible to encourage that country’s return to the full enjoy¬ 
ment of the spiritual and material life of the world of na¬ 
tions. Because we as members of other churches are bound 
to stand side by side with our brethren of the German Evan¬ 
gelical Church, who uphold the principles for which the 
Oxford Conference stands, we should, he proposed, join 
in sending them, through a personal delegation rather than 
merely in writing, the following message: 

THE BRETHREN IN THE CHRISTIAN CHURCHES 
ASSEMBLED AT OXFORD 

TO THEIR BRETHREN IN THE EVANGELICAL 
CHURCH IN GERMANY: 

The representatives of Christian churches, assembled at Ox¬ 
ford from all parts of the world, mourn the absence of their 
brethren in the German Evangelical Church, with whom they 
have been closely bound both in the preparations for this con¬ 
ference and in the great tasks which are set before the universal 
church. 

We welcome the fact that an agreement had been reached 
that a common delegation of the German Evangelical Church 
should be sent to Oxford; we therefore miss the more the great 
help which its members would have given in the treatment of 
the fundamental questions of our time. But though your dele¬ 
gates are absent, the very circumstances of their absence have 
created a stronger sense of fellowship than before. 

We are greatly moved by the afflictions of many pastors and 
laymen who have stood firm from the first in the Confessional 
church for the sovereignty of Christ, and for the freedom of the 
church of Christ to preach his gospel. 


72 World Chaos or World Christianity 

We note the gravity of the struggle in which not your church 
alone, but the Roman Catholic Church as well, is engaged, 
against distortion and suppression of Christian witness, and 
for the training of the young in a living faith in Jesus Christ as 
Son of God and King of kings and Lord of lords. 

We remember the words of the Scriptures: “ There is one 
body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your 
calling.” “ If one member suffer all the members suffer with it, 
or one member is honored all the members rejoice with it.” So 
we,, your brethren in other churches, are one with our suffering 
brethren in the German Evangelical Church in love and prayer. 
Your Lord is our Lord, your faith our faith, your baptism our 
baptism. We are moved to a more living trust ourselves by your 
steadfast witness to Christ, and we pray that we may be given 
grace in all our churches to bear the same clear witness to the 
Lord. 

We pray God to bless you, and to guide and comfort you in 
your afflictions; and we call upon the churches throughout the 
world to make intercession for you with our Father in Heaven, 
and to rejoice that once again it has been proved that a faith 
born of sacrifice is counted worthy of sacrifice. 

The conference, visibly moved, adopted this message by 
a standing vote, and also the bishop’s proposal that a dele¬ 
gation go to the Evangelical Church in Germany to deliver 
the message and to inform the church about the proceed¬ 
ings of the conference as a whole. 

This message, be it recalled, was issued at a time when 
already more than a hundred pastors of the German Evan¬ 
gelical Church were under arrest, including several who 
were scheduled to address the conference, and many more 
were forbidden to preach or to speak in public. It was the 
one thing concerning Oxford which the controlled press 
of deluded Germany reported to the German people. But 
to say even this is to exaggerate: so far as we could discover 
the message itself was kept from the Germans by their own 
press. A protest against the message was made at Oxford 
by three Germans not members of the German Evangelical 


Oxford Thinks—and Speaks 73 

Church but of small minority churches, insignificant in size 
compared to the great Protestant body of Lutherans and 
Reformed Evangelicals. Because of their clever strategy 
these small free churches have remained practically unmo¬ 
lested up to the present time by the National Socialist gov¬ 
ernment. Their protest was what the Reich press blazoned 
from one end of the country to the other. No better proof 
of the actual state of affairs in that land in this tragic time 
could have been offered the world. 

Subsequent events and the sending of the delegation 
which the conference had authorized brought unmistak¬ 
able evidence that the Confessional churchmen — the 
strong Evangelical opposition to the so-called “ practical 
Christianity” of Hitler — deeply appreciated both the 
action and the message. That they were not permitted to 
take part in the conference to which they had looked for¬ 
ward and in preparation for which their ablest leaders had 
worked through tireless months was to them but one 
further proof, if any were needed, that the forces of Anti¬ 
christ were bent on the isolation of the German church and 
the corruption or destruction of Christianity in the land of 
Martin Luther. Nothing could have emphasized more 
strikingly the timeliness of Oxford’s endeavor to open 
the eyes of Christians the world over to the danger in which 
the church stands when a state seeks virtually to become 
itself a church by demanding not only political obedience 
but blind loyalty of heart and mind and conscience from 
every man, woman and child within its borders. 

Besides these messages, as I have indicated, the confer¬ 
ence issued the five main reports of the sections, which em¬ 
body the fruits of the collective thinking done during 
strenuous days and nights of conscientious work. To these 
we now turn. One general thread may be discerned in 
them all — the one I have suggested in the title of this 


74 World Chaos or World Christianity 

book, although it was not so phrased at Oxford: the impera¬ 
tive need of a world in chaos for a new expression of world 
Christianity. Not in a spirit of superiority did these repre¬ 
sentative Christians speak; rather was it with humility and 
penitence. They recognized that the church as an institu¬ 
tion had failed sadly to show forth the spirit of her Master 
in her organization, her work and her witness. Each of 
the great problems presented was studied from the point 
of view of its relationship not merely to the findings of hu¬ 
man reason but also and primarily of its relationship to 
Christ’s revelation of the nature of God and man’s place 
in the purpose of God. In other words, the practical con¬ 
siderations were but introductory to a reconsideration of 
the theological side so often neglected by the church in 
recent years, with the result of superficiality and loss of 
conviction before the tests of demonic evil in men and in 
nations. 


I. CHURCH AND COMMUNITY 

The report of this section was warmly welcomed by prac¬ 
tically the whole conference, which expressed general ap¬ 
proval of it after several hours of discussion in plenary ses¬ 
sion. Nineteen persons took part in this discussion. The 
variety of their backgrounds gives striking testimony to the 
desire of the chairman of the business committee. Dr. John 
R. Mott, and of his associates to make certain that as many 
points of view as possible be represented. The nineteen 
speakers on this report, for example, included seven Con¬ 
tinentals, of whom two were from the Orthodox Church; 
five Americans, of whom two were Negroes; three Asiatics; 
three Britons; and one South African of European blood. 

The summary of the work of the section given by its 
chairman, Sir Walter Moberly, was followed with almost 
painful intensity; for one of the major problems of the 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 75 

Christian church is how it is to fulfill its task in the midst 
of a divided, disunited world wherein the very foundations 
of communal or social life are shaken. The report indi¬ 
cates that the root cause of the disintegration of society is 
that human life has tried to organize itself on a humanistic 
basis without reference to God’s purpose and power. The 
essential message of the church is that in God is the key to 
true community and that in Jesus Christ is revealed the 
character of God. Before the church can recall the world 
to God it must remember in contrition that its own life, 
which should make him manifest, is deeply infected with 
the diseases of the common life. The Christian church is 
not set in a vacuum; it must obey God’s call in the concrete 
realities of daily life. From this fact springs unceasing ten¬ 
sion for both the church and the individual Christian; the 
church must hold fast to its one supreme calling to bear 
costly witness in deed and word to the higher way of 
Christianity. 

The report calls special attention to three urgent prob¬ 
lems on which the church must bear witness: First, the 
problem involved in the elevation of the nation to divine 
status; second, the problem involved in racial discrimina¬ 
tion; third, the problem involved in the establishing of 
closer relationships between the church and the common 
life in deed as well as in word. In view of the immediate 
urgency of these problems a supplementary declaration was 
drawn up, as follows: 

(1) “ God wills all men to be saved.” Therefore he has in 
Christ come to us, and therefore he has established his church 
among us to proclaim the message of salvation through Christ 
for all nations. The church has the only all-decisive source for 
its message about God and his will in the revelation of God in 
Christ. 

(2) As Christians we consider our membership in a distinct 
community (Volk) as a divine gift. The love of a Christian 


76 World Chaos or World Christianity 

for his people is also his gratitude toward God for the gift 
thereby given to him. 

(3) In order to fulfill its task the church takes its place in 
the community (Volk) wherein human life is lived. This does 
not mean the subordination of the church to the national life, 
but the effective fulfillment of its task to reach all members of 
the community with the gospel pure and undefiled. 

(4) Every kind of national egotism, where the love of one’s 
own nation leads to the suppression of other nationalities (mi¬ 
norities) , is sin and rebellion against God, the Lord of all 
nations. 

(5) The deification of one’s own people is sin against God. 
“ Thou shalt have none other God but me.” To see in one’s 
own people (in one’s own blood) the saving revelation of God 
is anti-Christian. “ Neither is there salvation in any other: for 
there is none other name under heaven given amongst men 
whereby we must be saved.” 

The nature of the full report may best be understood 
from the practical suggestions which form a part of it and 
which I quote in full: 

There is a call from God today 

(1) To every local congregation, to realize at any cost in 
its own self that unity, transcending all differences and barriers 
of class, social status, race and nation, which we believe the 
Holy Spirit can and will create in those who are ready to be led 
by him. 

(2) To different churches in any district, to come together 
for a local ecumenical witness in worship and work. 

(3) To all Christians, to a more passionate and costly con¬ 
cern for the outcast, the underprivileged, the persecuted and 
the despised in the community and beyond the community. 
The recrudescence of pitiless cruelty, hatreds and race dis¬ 
criminations (including anti-Semitism) in the modem world 
is one of the major signs of its social disintegration. To these 
must be brought not the weak rebuke of words but the power¬ 
ful rebuke of deeds. Thus the unity of the church is advanced. 
The church has been called into existence by God not for itself 
but for the world. Only by going out of itself in the work of 
Christ can it find unity in itself. 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 77 

(4) More specifically to the church, to extend its concern 
to the particular areas of life where existing conditions con¬ 
tinuously undo its work and thwart the will of God for his 
children — conditions such as misunderstanding between old 
and young, tension between men and women, health, housing, 
employment, recreation, in both their distinctive rural and 
urban forms. Thus the church seeks to express God’s concern 
for every man in his own neighborhood and vocation. 

(5) To the church, to undertake new social experiments, 
especially in local communities, through which the general 
level of conscience may be raised. 

(6) To the church, to play a healing and reconciling part 
in the conflicts, misunderstandings or hatreds which arise be¬ 
tween interests or classes within the local community or the 
nation. 

(7) To the church, to encourage authoritative study of 
mooted problems in such areas as race and industry and to 
draw together Christians of different races and groups for 
united study, fellowship and action. 

(8) To Christian men and women in the same vocation or 
industry, to meet together for prayerful discussion as to how 
in their particular sphere of the common life the problems 
which arise can be dealt with as God would require. 

(9) To members of the Christian church, to be ready to 
undertake responsibilities in local and national government. 
The church should seek to guide and support these its repre¬ 
sentatives in their efforts to solve the problems by which they 
are faced in the light of Christian principles. 

(10) To all Christians, to seek by simplicity and discipline 
in personal living to go beyond the accepted standards of the 
community in the love revealed in Christ. 

Finally, there is laid upon the Christian church in all lands 
the obligation to create and to foster among all its branches 
and among all its members solidarity and cooperation, which 
are stronger than all the divisions which now disrupt the family 
of mankind. The ecumenical movement which has found ex¬ 
pression in the conference at Oxford should become an integral 
part in the life of every church, every local congregation and 
every individual Christian. To help to create it, to support it, 
to develop it, is a solemn responsibility to God who so loved the 
world that he gave his only begotten Son for its sin. Thus shall 


78 World Chaos or World Christianity 

be plainly manifested to mankind in its chaos and division 
something of that peace and order of brotherly love which come 
only from God and from Jesus Christ his Son, our Lord. 

II. CHURCH AND STATE 

The report on this subject suggests that its purpose was 
not to set forth an abstract doctrine of the relation of 
church and state, but to express the Christian’s attitude to¬ 
ward the secularization of modern society and the growing 
power of the state and to distinguish from their applica¬ 
tions in differing historical situations those principles and 
duties which determine the Christian attitude toward the 
state in all circumstances. 

Under the first heading, “ Principles,” it is recognized 
that for the Christian there “ can be no ultimate authority 
but very God.” The state is at the same time an order 
within which Christians have to live and witness for Christ, 
and an institution toward which the church both as a cor¬ 
porate body and as a fellowship of witnessing Christians 
may be called to take differing positions, either of coopera¬ 
tion, criticism, or opposition, in differing historical situa¬ 
tions. In any discussion of the relation of state and church, 
therefore, the historical situation must always be consid¬ 
ered. 

Two facts characteristic of the present time which lay 
upon the church the duty of redefining its practical attitude 
are the growing dechristianization of the populations of 
some countries and the widespread tendency of the state to 
assume control of the whole of human life in all its indi¬ 
vidual and social aspects, and to attribute absolute value to 
itself, to the national community, to the dominating class, 
or to the prevailing cultural form. 

The report includes a fourfold statement of principles, 
as follows: 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 


79 


THE DISTINCTIVE FUNCTIONS OF CHURCH AND OF STATE 

The church as the trustee of God’s redeeming gospel and 
the state as the guarantor of order, justice, and civil liberty have 
distinct functions in regard to society. The church’s concern 
is to witness to men of the realities which outlast change be¬ 
cause they are founded on the eternal will of God. The con¬ 
cern of the state is to provide men with justice, order and se¬ 
curity in a world of sin and change. As it is the aim of the 
church to create a community founded on divine love, it can¬ 
not do its work by coercion, nor must it compromise the stand¬ 
ards embodied in God’s commandments by surrender to the 
necessities of the day. The state, on the other hand, has the 
duty of maintaining public order, and therefore must use coer¬ 
cion and accept the limits of the practicable. 

The distinctive character of the church’s activity is the free 
operation of grace and love. The distinctive character of the 
state’s activity, whatever its constructive function in cultural 
and social life may be, is the power of constraint, legal and 
physical. In consequence there are certain social activities 
which clearly belong to the church and others which clearly 
belong to the state; there are, however, still others which may 
be performed by either church or state. In this area tension is 
unavoidable and solutions will vary in varying historical cir¬ 
cumstances. It is true that our Lord told his disciples to render 
to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that 
are God’s. But it is God who declares what is Caesar’s. There¬ 
fore, whatever the choice may be, the Christian must always, 
whether as a member of the church or as a citizen, obey the 
will of God. 


DUTIES OF THE CHURCH TO THE STATE 

The primary duty of the church to the state is to be the 
church, namely, to witness for God, to preach his word, to con¬ 
fess the faith before men, to teach both young and old to ob¬ 
serve the divine commandments, and to serve the nation and 
the state by proclaiming the will of God as the supreme stand¬ 
ard to which all human wills must be subject and all human 
conduct must conform. These functions of worship, preaching, 
teaching and ministry the church cannot renounce whether the 
state consent or not. 


8o 


World Chaos or World Christianity 


From this responsibility certain duties follow for the churches 
and for their members. 

(a) Duties with Reference to the Individual State. These 
duties are (a) that of praying for the state, its people and its 
governments; ( b ) that of loyalty and obedience to the state, 
disobedience becoming a duty only if obedience would be 
clearly contrary to the command of God; (c) that of coopera¬ 
tion with the state in promoting the welfare of the citizens and 
of lending moral support to the state when it upholds the 
standards of justice set forth in the Word of God; (d) that of 
criticism of the state when it departs from those standards; (e) 
that of holding before men in all their legislation and admin¬ 
istration those principles which make for the upholding of the 
dignity of man who is made in the image of God; (/) that of 
permeating the public life with the spirit of Christ and of train¬ 
ing up men and women who as Christians can contribute to 
this end. 

These duties rest upon Christians not only as individuals 
redeemed by Christ who must witness for him in whatever posi¬ 
tion they may occupy in the state, but also upon the church as 
a Christian community. The church can serve the state in no 
better way than by illustrating in its own life the kind of life 
which is God’s will for society as a whole. Only in the measure 
that it seeks to realize this mission is it in a position to rebuke 
the state for its sins and failures for which both individual 
Christians and the church in its organized capacity have been 
in no small measure responsible. 

(b) Duties with Reference to the State in Its Relations to 
Other States. In the interpretation of these duties it is impor¬ 
tant to keep constantly in mind that as the church in its own 
sphere is a universal society, so to Christian faith the individual 
state is not itself the ultimate political unit, but a member of a 
family of nations with international relations and duties which 
it is the responsibility not only of the individual Christians but 
also of the churches to affirm and to promote. 

THE FREEDOM OF THE CHURCH 

In a state which is Christian by profession it is self-evident 
that the church should be free to the fullest extent to fulfill its 
function. It should also be evident that where in such a state 
there are majority and minority churches the same essential 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 


81 


liberty to carry out the church’s function should be enjoyed by 
minorities as well as by the majority. All churches should re¬ 
nounce the use of the coercive power of the state in matters of 
religion. Membership in a minority church should not be a 
reason for denying full civil and political equality. 

In a state which acknowledges a liberal doctrine of rights it is 
equally evident that the church like other associations should 
have the liberty which its function requires. In countries 
where the church finds in the theory and constitution of the 
state nothing on which to base a claim to right, this does not 
absolve the church from its primary duty of witness. This duty 
must then include a witness against such a denial of funda¬ 
mental justice. And if the state tries to hinder or suppress such 
witness, all other churches have the duty of supporting this 
church and giving it the utmost succor and relief in their 
power. 

We recognize as essential conditions necessary to the 
church’s fulfillment of its primary duty that it should enjoy: 
{a) freedom to determine its faith and creed; ( b) freedom of 
public and private worship, preaching and teaching; ( c) free¬ 
dom from any imposition by the state of religious ceremonies 
and forms of worship; ( d) freedom to determine the nature 
of its government and the qualifications of its ministers and 
members and, conversely, the freedom of the individual to join 
the church to which he feels called; ( e) freedom to control the 
education of its ministers, to give religious instruction to its 
youth and to provide for adequate development of their reli¬ 
gious life; (/) freedom of Christian service and missionary ac¬ 
tivity, both home and foreign; (g) freedom to cooperate with 
other churches; ( h ) freedom to use such facilities, open to all 
citizens or associations, as will make possible the accomplish¬ 
ment of these ends: the ownership of property and the collec¬ 
tion of funds. 

The freedom essential for the church can in fact exist both 
in churches organized as free associations under the general 
laws of a country and in churches established in an organic or 
other special connection with the state. If, however, this con¬ 
nection should result in impairing the church’s freedom to 
carry out its distinctive mission, it would then become the duty 
of its ministers and members to do all in their power to secure 
this freedom, even at the cost of disestablishment. 


82 


World Chaos or World Christianity 


THE PRESENT TASKS OF THE CHURCH 

What then follows from this survey as to the present tasks 
and opportunities of the churches? This at least, that it is 
their duty: 

(1) To summon their own members to repentance, both 
as individuals and as organized bodies, for their sins of omis¬ 
sion and of commission and to pray for the spirit of consecra¬ 
tion which shall make of them, both in their separate and in 
their united activities, agents which God may use for his pur¬ 
pose in the world. 

(2) To create within the local community, the nation, and 
the world such agencies of cooperative action as shall make it 
possible for them to discharge effectively such tasks as can be 
done in common. 

(3) To summon their individual members in their several 
callings — not only clerical but also lay members, men and 
women — to cooperate with the state in such constructive tasks 
as may be for the good of the whole. 

(4) To guard for all churches, both as groups of witnessing 
Christians and in their organized capacity, the opportunity of 
worship, of witness, of service, and of education which is essen¬ 
tial to their mission, and this not for their own sake only, but 
for the sake of the states. 

(5) To follow with sympathetic interest the fortunes of 
those, Christians and non-Christians, who are victims of 
cruelty and oppression, and to do what they can to secure for 
them a treatment compatible with the dignity of their human 
personality as children of God. 

(6) To renounce publicly and forever the use of all forms 
of persecution, whether by Christians against other Christians 
or by Christians against adherents of other religions. 

III. THE CHURCH AND THE ECONOMIC ORDER 

The four hour debate which prepared the way for the 
acceptance by the whole conference of the work done by 
its section on economics demonstrated to the surprise of 
all that there was little disagreement with the principles 
set forth and none of a really serious nature. It was uni- 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 83 

versally recognized that there had gone into the making of 
the report not only the scholarship of renowned leaders of 
the church but likewise the long experience of men of largfc 
public and business affairs, such as Vice-Chancellor Johfl 
Maud of University College, Oxford; Sir Josiah Stamp, 
railway president and banker; T. S. Eliot, poet; R. H. 
Tawney, economist, and John MacMurray, philosopher — 
all of Great Britain; Honorable Francis B. Sayre, assistant 
secretary of state; Honorable Charles P. Taft; Dr. Reinhold 
Niebuhr and Mr. James M. Speers, of the United States; 
and men of like standing in other lands. 

What this degree of unanimity meant in the final stages 
of the report the reader can better appreciate when I point 
out that on one of the early days of the discussion a promi¬ 
nent American financier, a member of the section, was over¬ 
heard to say to one of his business friends: “No, I can’t 
stand any more of that discussion. You go and vote * No * 
on everything! That will represent both of us.” He later 
was among those who defended the section’s findings. 

Mr. Sayre, in advocating the report’s affirmation that “ it 
is largely the economic cleavages that are splitting the na¬ 
tions apart,” said: “We, in the American government, are 
convinced that lasting peace can never come until the peo¬ 
ple constructively build for it. There must be changed 
economic policies. That is why we are bending every en¬ 
ergy to tear down the indefensible trade barriers which 
force down in every nation the national standards of liv¬ 
ing.” Mr. James M. Speers found that the report “could 
be easily understood by businessmen.” He did add, how¬ 
ever, that “ there was too much pessimism in the report.” 
Others, including the Dutch minister of labor and Mrs. 
Harper Sibley, wife of the former president of the Chamber 
of Commerce of the United States, gave their strong sup¬ 
port to the section. The participation of these people 


84 World Chaos or World Christianity 

shows clearly that not only theorists and theologians were 
speaking to the church. 

The section issued the following summary statements: 

THE RELEVANCE OF THE CHRISTIAN GOSPEL TO THE 
ECONOMIC ORDER 

The Christian church approaches the problems of the social 
and economic order from the standpoint of her faith in the 
revelation of God in Christ. Through his redemptive work 
Christ made the whole range of human life subject to that law 
of love which he perfectly embodied in his own life and death. 
The charter of Christian practice is therefore given to us in 
that second commandment which Christ said is like unto the 
first and without obedience to which the first could not be 
obeyed — namely, “ Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” 
Obedience to this commandment of love in the economic 
sphere means the pursuit of justice. Christians must therefore 
do everything in their power to create a more just ordering of 
economic life by attempting to secure for all who are their 
neighbors such opportunities as are necessary for their full 
development as persons in body, mind and spirit. The respon¬ 
sibility of the church is to insist on the true relationship of 
spiritual and economic goods. Our human wealth consists in 
fellowship with God and in him with our brethren. To this 
fellowship the whole economic order must be made sub¬ 
servient. 

THE CHIEF POINTS IN THE ECONOMIC SPHERE AT WHICH THE 
PURPOSE OF GOD IS CHALLENGED 

The subordination of God’s purpose for human life to the 
demands of the economic process seems in practice to be a tend¬ 
ency common to all existing kinds of economic organization. 
In particular we draw attention to certain features of modern 
life in the so-called capitalist countries of the world. 

(1) The ordering of economic life has tended to enhance 
acquisitiveness and to set up a false standard of economic and 
social success. 

(2) Indefensible inequalities of opportunity in regard to 
education, leisure and health continue to prevail; and the ex- 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 85 

istence of economic classes presents an obstacle to human fellow¬ 
ship which cannot be tolerated by the Christian conscience. 

(3) Centers of economic power have been formed which are 
not responsible to any organ of the community and which in 
practice constitute something in the nature of a tyranny over 
the lives of masses of men. 

(4) The only forms of employment open to many men and 
women, or the fact that none is open at all, prevent them from 
finding a sense of Christian vocation in their daily life. 

HOSTILITY TO CHRISTIANITY OF SOME MOVEMENTS WHICH HAVE 
ARISEN IN CONSEQUENCE OF THESE EVILS 

We are witnessing new movements which have arisen in re¬ 
action to these evils but which combine with their struggle for 
social justice the repudiation of all religious faith. Aware of 
the reality of sin, the church knows that no change in the out¬ 
ward ordering of life can of itself eradicate social evil. The 
church, therefore, cannot surrender to the utopian expecta¬ 
tions of these movements and it must unequivocally reject their 
godlessness, but in doing so it must recognize that Christians in 
their blindness to the challenging evils of the economic order 
have been partly responsible for the antireligious character of 
these movements. 

THE RESPONSE OF THE CHRISTIAN TO THESE CHALLENGES 

Christians have a double duty — both to bear witness to 
their faith within the existing economic order and to test all 
economic institutions in the light of their understanding of 
God’s will. The forces of evil against which Christians have 
to contend are found not only in the hearts of men as indi¬ 
viduals, but have entered into and infected the structure of 
society and there also must be combated. 

In spite of agreement on the necessity of effecting changes 
in the economic order Christians have no reason to expect that 
they will always find themselves in agreement on particular 
issues or belonging to one political party. This is especially 
true of issues in which technical factors predominate, con¬ 
cerning which honest differences of judgment must be ex¬ 
pected. Nor do Christians escape those deeper differences of 
social conviction which are rooted in differing economic, geo- 


86 


World Chaos or World Christianity 


graphical and historical circumstances. The very recognition 
of this fact by all groups within the church might well mitigate 
the extremism to which each group is tempted. The church 
should be a fellowship in Christ which transcends differences 
of judgment and divergences of action in relation to the con¬ 
crete economic situation. 

CHRISTIAN TEACHING IN RELATION TO THE ECONOMIC ORDER 

The church can give guidance which is less general than the 
basic theological teaching emphasized above and which is less 
particular than advice concerning specific programs and spe¬ 
cific political decisions. The basis of such guidance is to be 
found in the affirmations of faith concerning God as creator and 
redeemer, the nature of man, and the commandment of love. 
We suggest three ways in which these affirmations of faith can 
become the basis for the guidance which the church can give its 
members relative to economic life. 

(1) The Christian message should deal with long range 
goals, standards and principles by means of which every con¬ 
crete situation and every proposal for improving it must be 
tested. Implicit in many of these principles is Christian teach¬ 
ing about property, and this is therefore a subject to which 
Christians should give special attention. 

(2) The Christian message should throw a searchlight on 
the actual facts of the existing situation and, in particular, re¬ 
veal the human consequences of present forms of economic be¬ 
havior. What, in isolation, seems to be purely destructive 
criticism is a necessary part of the total process by which con¬ 
structive change is brought about. 

(3) The Christian message should make clear the obstacles 
to economic justice in the human heart, especially those that 
are present in the hearts of people within the church. 

IMMEDIATE CHRISTIAN ACTION 

Action by the Churches 

(a) Reform of Their Own Institutional Life. A church can 
offer a convincing example in the social and economic sphere 
only when it has set its own house in order. 

(b) Development of New Machinery for Research and Ac¬ 
tion. The church should be adequately equipped for the pur- 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 87 

pose of study and research in the economic sphere, and also 
for witness and action. The cooperation of the laity with the 
clergy in this connection is indispensable. 

(c) Integration of Work and Worship. There should be 
no discontinuity between daily business in the world and spe¬ 
cifically religious activities. The unity of work and worship 
must be re-established in the experience of men and women. 

Action by Christians 

(a) Action within the Existing Economic Order. Chris¬ 
tians must bear witness to the faith they profess in the daily 
practice of industry, commerce and the professions. A wide 
field for Christian action also lies open in the administrative 
work of local and national government bodies, the cooperative 
movement and many other agencies of social service. 

(b) Group Experiments. During periods of transition such 
as the present there is a peculiar opportunity for groups of 
Christians to experiment along possible lines of advance in 
community life. 

(c) Changing the Economic Order. For reasons which 
have been suggested above the Christian must be prepared to 
take sides and participate in political and other forms of group 
action. 

IV. CHURCH, COMMUNITY AND STATE IN RELATION 
TO EDUCATION 

The lengthy report of this group deals with the problem 
of the respective spheres and mutual relations of church, 
community and state in so far as they may be educating or 
may claim the right to educate the same persons. The first 
section sets forth certain characteristics of church, com¬ 
munity and state which affect the problem. The church, 
obviously, is a fellowship of free persons, under law to 
Christ, redemptive, supra-national, super-racial, supra-class 
and eternal. But the church cannot substantiate her claim 
to be all these things because she can neither speak nor act 
as one universal community — which affects her capacity to 
discharge her own particular function in education. 


88 World Chaos or World Christianity 

Among present circumstances which complicate the rela¬ 
tions of church, community and state in education, atten¬ 
tion is called to the secularization of modern life, man’s 
faith in his power to direct his own destiny, social disinte¬ 
gration, the weakening of family ties, the shift of interest 
in education, the rise of new educational agencies, and the 
increasing intervention of the state in education. The four 
major issues on which church and state conflict in education 
are stated to be freedom, social disintegration, control.of 
youth movements, and modern knowledge, method and 
technique. 

Under the last heading it is stated that the situation 
makes on the church a double demand. She must keep 
abreast of all educational improvements, but must realize 
that no technique alone will suffice for the building up of 
the whole man into Christ. The spirit of Christ must be 
mediated through persons to persons. The church must 
proclaim with power that without the Christian gospel 
there can be no final attainment of mental and spiritual 
health. If the church is to discharge her teaching duty she 
must bring her communions into a common front on edu¬ 
cational issues and unite her forces in fulfilling this urgent 
task. 

The report then sums up the basic assumptions which are 
believed to underlie an education acceptable to Christians, 
and presses the necessity of formulating a philosophy of 
education from the Christian standpoint and of developing 
a psychology which does not disregard the significance of 
religious experience. Comprehensive statements set forth 
the educational task of the church through her own insti¬ 
tutions and membership, and the relation of the church to 
public education where the government is responsive to 
Christian opinion, and end with a section, perhaps the most 
eagerly awaited, on the task of the church in regard to 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 89 

Christian education in a non-Christian environment. A 
pregnant sentence states that “ the church is at one with all 
true scholarship in every sphere in insisting that education 
may not submit to the bias of propaganda, but must pre¬ 
serve the pure and disinterested pursuit of truth.” The 
report ends with a paragraph which goes to the heart of the 
matter. The church’s largest contribution to education, 
it is stated, like her supreme ministry to human life, is her 
gospel with its interpretation of existence and its inspira¬ 
tion to live worthily. “ It is all-important that the gospel 
should supply the presuppositions of all education, by what¬ 
ever agency it is given, and create the spiritual atmosphere 
which pervades every institution of true learning.” 

After a discussion in which fifteen delegates participated 
the conference gave unanimous general approval to this 
report. 


V. THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH AND THE WORLD OF NATIONS 

Of this report, whose making I have already described in 
some detail, Basil Mathews well says: “ No more searching, 
trenchant, and challenging statement on the revolutionary 
function of the church in the world of nations, and espe¬ 
cially in face of the issues of war and peace, has ever come 
from any representative world Christian gathering than 
that unanimously adopted by the conference. Nineteen 
speakers, presenting every possible viewpoint, joined in 
the discussion, while forty-two others for whom no time 
could be found intimated their desire to speak and were 
asked to contribute their suggestions in written form.” 

Any summary of this section’s statements must be inade¬ 
quate. They should be read and pondered in the whole 
context of the reports. We are called, the conference said, 
to believe in the power and love of God and to realize that 


go World Chaos or World Christianity 

today the Christian community is not only for the first time 
coextensive with the habitable globe, but increasingly real¬ 
izes that it is itself one. It is ecumenical, a world factor 
whose unity is in Christ. Following is a summary of the 
statements: 

In a world of fear, tension and disillusionment the church’s 
first duty is to call men to repentance and faith. The world 
belongs to God; victory has been won in Jesus Christ. 

The central element in the church’s testimony in regard to 
international relations is the fact of its own ecumenical char¬ 
acter. The church must therefore press on with the supreme 
task of the evangelization of the world, realize in fact her own 
true character by increasing the ecumenical consciousness of 
her members, assert in virtue of her knowledge of Christ that 
all men are brethren, and bring to bear upon all human situa¬ 
tions the insight into human nature and the transforming 
power which Christ gives. 

Christians can never equate any form of international order 
with the kingdom of God; at the same time, their attitude to¬ 
ward specific proposals within that realm must be governed by 
their understanding of the purpose of God in Christ. 

Relations between states have not been brought under the 
rule of law in the same way as those between citizens or groups 
within a single state. Law and force are not conjoined in the 
international sphere. Whether the world moves toward a fed¬ 
eral organization, or toward a closer cooperation of sovereign 
states, the evil of unconditional national sovereignty has to be 
faced. A special responsibility of Christians lies in the crea¬ 
tion among all nations of the spirit which will support the 
fabric of international law. 

A crucial need is the securing of such necessary changes in 
the international order as may remove acknowledged injustice 
and provide for growth and development. Such changes de¬ 
pend upon the action of governments. The churches should 
take measures to secure adequate factual knowledge and should 
move governments to adopt policies that will make for equality 
of opportunity, even at the expense of temporary sacrifice. 

The conference, facing the attempts that have been made 
to achieve a better international order, recognizes the need 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 


9 1 

for revision in the structure of the League of Nations, and the 
failure of member states to observe their compacts. At the 
same time it welcomes the successes gained by the league and 
affirms both that the idea on which it was founded remains 
true, and that no rival method of realizing that idea exists. 
Similarly it welcomes the provision of an international tribunal 
for the settlement of justiciable disputes. But there are char¬ 
acteristically Christian ways of peace-making which the church 
has yet to explore. 

War is a defiance of the righteousness of God as revealed in 
Jesus Christ. No justification of war may obscure this truth. 
For the Christian, the need both to obey the absolute law of 
love and to do what is best in a given situation leads to agoniz¬ 
ing difficulty. Opposite views of right decision in the matter 
of participation in war are taken on religious grounds by Chris¬ 
tians. The church must recognize that this perplexity arises 
from the sin in which its members are implicated, but must not 
acquiesce in the continuance of the differences. The Christian 
fellowship meanwhile must fully embrace those who take dif¬ 
ferent views. Christians are called on to confess their own share 
in the guilt of war, to pray for their enemies, and to labor in 
every way against war and for peace. 

Among the practical steps which churches should undertake 
are the following: (a) to banish from the churches racial bar¬ 
riers which are a denial of their ecumenical character; ( b ) to 
develop the interdependence of the church by increasing mu¬ 
tual help; ( c ) to labor for the removal of hindrances to reli¬ 
gious freedom; ( d ) to educate the members of the churches in 
the meaning of their membership in the universal church; ( e ) 
to foster education in the problems which underlie the achieve¬ 
ment of a better international order; (/) to work for the limita¬ 
tions of armaments by common agreement among states; (g) 
to support in every way the organizations now working through 
the churches for peace, and to set up an adequate organization 
of the churches for common ecumenical study and action. 

Dr. John Mackay, chairman of the group that framed 
this report, said he hoped that the work of this ecumenical 
movement would be done along two lines —by teamwork 
without compromise, and by thought with action. He 


92 World Chaos or World Christianity 

hoped that in the future of the movement what has been 
thought with clarity and said in love may be carried out 
with decision. 

From a practical point of view the most creative work of 
the Oxford Conference is that connected with its action in 
recommending to the churches a much more unified, inclu¬ 
sive and authoritative world-wide organization than any 
now in existence. Because of its great importance and the 
prominence given to it in two full sessions at Oxford discus¬ 
sion of it at this point might seem natural. But as a mat¬ 
ter of fact the Oxford debate on the world council proposed 
by the Committee of Thirty-five, which had been charged 
by both the Universal Christian Council and the World 
Conference on Faith and Order to study and make recom¬ 
mendations concerning the future of the ecumenical move¬ 
ment, was repeated in somewhat the same form at Edin¬ 
burgh a few weeks later. The story of the actions of both 
conferences really constitutes one story in two parts. For 
the sake of clearness these ought not to be separated, and 
for the sake of historical order they seem to belong not 
here but at the end of the account of what happened at 
Edinburgh, which I propose to give later. 

Before leaving Oxford for Edinburgh we will therefore 
take only a glance at the great session in the Town Hall 
at which the question of the recommendations for the 
creation of a world council of churches came to a vote. 
There had been prolonged debate both on the floor and 
in the corridors and college halls wherever delegates met 
together. Difficulties and differences had been pro¬ 
nounced. Many predicted that any such action would 
“ split the conference wide open.” Even the complete 
unanimity of the remarkable Committee of Thirty-five — 
whose personnel I shall describe in the final chapter of this 


Oxford Thinks—and Speaks 


93 

book — left some unimpressed and fearful of one-sided in¬ 
fluences or emphases. 

It was ten-thirty on Thursday evening, July 22, when the 
chairman put the question to the house. At first, as a 
veritable forest of hands went up, it seemed as if there 
were complete and surprising unanimity. But when the 
call came for the negative vote there appeared to be 
two delegates in opposition — one from Wales and one 
from Scotland, both Anglicans, who frankly said that they 
feared the creation of a world council would retard, if it 
did not obscure, the work of the Faith and Order part of 
the ecumenical movement and likewise retard rather than 
advance the ultimate complete organic reunion of all Chris¬ 
tendom. 

As over against the four hundred and twenty-three votes 
favoring the world council proposals, this degree of opposi¬ 
tion, even though it was obviously deeply conscientious, 
could not seriously dampen the enthusiasm of the confer¬ 
ence over what had been done that night. And as later de¬ 
velopments proved, modifications in the form of the pro¬ 
posals met so well the difficulties of the principal opponent 
of the plan that he found himself able to support it when it 
came before the Edinburgh Conference. 

To those who were acquainted with the short and not 
too impressive history of world-wide Christian cooperation 
across denominational lines, that evening will always stand 
out as a time when God wrought mightily in his living 
church. Its consequences may be felt through many suc¬ 
ceeding centuries. Why this is so, and what is involved in 
the proposals, I shall try to explain in detail later on. 

The inspiring closing service at Oxford took place on 
Sunday afternoon, July 25, following the morning com¬ 
munion of which I have already spoken. It was a time of 


94 World Chaos or World Christianity 

thanksgiving and dedication. The very fact that almost 
without exception the delegates remained for it — despite 
the long two weeks of work which had taxed their patience 
and endurance —was in itself impressive. Three speakers, 
Dr. John R. Mott, Dr. Marc Boegner, and Archbishop 
Eidem, representing the Anglo-Saxon, the French, and the 
Scandinavian nations, voiced briefly their convictions as to 
what the conference had brought into being and the fruits 
that might be expected to grow from it in the years to come. 
But most of the service was given to prayer, to worship and 
to meditation. It was led by the Archbishop of Canter¬ 
bury, although many others participated, and three lan¬ 
guages were used. 

Central in the service were the periods of silence which 
were part of the act of intercession. The words of this in¬ 
tercession, I think, sufficiently reveal the spirit of that hour. 
The archbishop read each part and paused long enough 
to permit us to make our own personal petitions under the 
inspiration of his words. 

As we thank God for what he has done for us let us pray for 
his blessing and inspiration in the work that lies ahead. 

May he who has begun a good work in us continue it until 
the day when Christ comes into his own. 

Let us think of those upon whom rests the responsibility for 
thinking out and carrying through the decisions taken as to 
the future of the ecumenical movement. 

For the representatives of Faith and Order, Life and Work, 
and all other bodies concerned. 

Silence. 

Let us think of all that lies in our hands in carrying back to 
our churches and our countries the meaning of the conference, 
in helping others to see what we have seen, and to set themselves 
to the tasks entrusted to us. 


Silence. 


Oxford Thinks — and Speaks 


95 

Let us pray once again for the whole church of Christ that it 
may be awakened from apathy, roused from cowardice and 
despondency, delivered from preoccupation with narrow and 
trivial interests, and kindled into new life. 

Silence. 

Let us pray for the world, remembering, before we separate 
from one another, the countries and peoples and churches in 
special distress and trial, making their sufferings and needs our 
own. 

Silence. 

As the service ended and the Oxford Conference became 
history, I thought of the sentences with which Dr. Edgar 
DeWitt Jones, president of the Federal Council of the 
Churches of Christ in America, had concluded his com¬ 
ment on the report of Section V — the Church Universal 
and the World of Nations. He had declared — and the 
truth of his observation was borne in upon me with pecul¬ 
iar force at St. Mary’s that late July afternoon: “We came 
to Oxford talking about our churches. We shall go home 
talking about the Church — the only firm ground of hope, 
and ‘ to evildoers terrible as an army with banners.’ ” 


IV 

EDINBURGH LISTENS —AND THINKS 
COLLECTIVELY 


B efore a congregation which the Scotsman, leading paper 
of Edinburgh, described as “ the most cosmopolitan 
that has ever assembled under the roof of St. Giles’ Cathe¬ 
dral,” the Archbishop of York preached the sermon which 
marked the beginning of the Edinburgh Conference on 
Faith and Order. It was August third. Eight days before 
the Oxford Conference on Church, Community and State 
had closed. During the intervening week the great num¬ 
ber of persons who were delegates to both conferences had 
joined in the service at St. Paul’s in London, had sought 
rest and recreation in England or Scotland, and had pre¬ 
pared themselves for a further two weeks of strenuous work 
in the interest of a more united Christian church. 

Oxford had served to remind us that there is desperate 
need for that unity if the church is to bear its witness to 
the unique and indispensable place of Christ in human life. 
Edinburgh was to afford us the opportunity of looking 
within the church in order that a clear light might be 
thrown upon the differences which divide us and new roads 
to reunion plotted on the charts of tomorrow. 

There was one notable, if incidental, difference between 
the two assemblies. Whereas at Oxford the great majority 
of the delegates had been strangers to one another, at Edin¬ 
burgh they felt that they began their work as friends 
brought closer by the momentous days they had spent to- 

96 


Edinburgh Listens — and Thinks Collectively 97 

gether exploring the relationships between church, state 
and society. 

To see the great assembly gathering once more — for to 
many of us it seemed almost the same despite the difference 
of function and outward setting — was to have one’s im¬ 
agination stirred by memories of other days on Auld Reek¬ 
ie’s famous “ Royal Mile.” The street which bears that 
nickname runs down the rocky eminence that dominates 
the Scottish capital, leading from the castle at the top to 
Holyrood palace at the bottom. Buildings famous in his¬ 
tory crowd along it — the Assembly Hall of the Church 
of Scotland, the Municipal Council Chambers, St. Giles’ 
Cathedral, the curiously gabled home of John Knox, the 
buildings of New College, theological department of Edin¬ 
burgh University. Below, on one side, runs Princes street, 
perhaps the loveliest street in the world, and on the other 
lies the low, shadowy passage along which the Covenanters 
walked on their way to Greyfriars’ Church, there to swear 
an allegiance which cost many of them their lives. Within 
the castle walls, topping the rock’s highest point, rises the 
exquisite Scots’ War Memorial, and nearby is the little 
square stone Chapel of St. Margaret, possibly the oldest 
place of worship in Scotland outside of Iona Island, whither 
St. Columbo brought the faith in the fourth century of the 
Christian era. 

Such a setting, reminding one at almost every turn of 
rugged faith and unconquerable courage, of loyalties that 
changed the course of many a life and of martyrdom tri¬ 
umphantly endured, was indeed a worthy one for the coun¬ 
cil which gathered for worship in St. Giles’ that August 
afternoon. 

The cathedral itself — or the “ High Kirk,” as Scotsmen 
call it — despite its stern traditions and its relative simplic¬ 
ity is an impressive Gothic pile of native stone begun in the 


98 World Chaos or World Christianity 

twelfth century. Architecturally its most notable feature 
is the beautiful crownlike tower which dominates the city. 
The interior is satisfyingly lighted. The organ is one of 
the best voiced in Europe and the cathedral’s remarkable 
acoustics do justice to its sonorous tones. St. Giles’ stands 
but a few rods below the Assembly Hall of the Church of 
Scotland where the conference was to have its ordinary ses¬ 
sions; hence the use of the cathedral for worship was con¬ 
venient and natural. 

The service on that first day was colorful, and symbolic 
of the purpose which had brought these hundreds of dele¬ 
gates over land and sea. The service was conducted by a 
Presbyterian, the sermon was preached by an Anglican, and 
the Old and New Testament lessons were read by rep¬ 
resentatives of the Lutheran and Eastern Orthodox com¬ 
munions respectively. The Archbishop of York, Dr. 
Temple — a son, by the way, of a former Archbishop of 
Canterbury — did not preach mere generalities. He was 
direct, frank, specific and engagingly sincere. What struck 
public attention most in his sermon, judging from the news¬ 
paper accounts of it, was his admission that his own com¬ 
munion was notable for its exclusiveness and his statement 
that he felt division of this character to be “ the greatest of 
all scandals in the face of the world.” The unity of God’s 
church, he declared, was and is a perpetual fact; but the 
world sees the sin of Christians more clearly than it sees the 
holiness and wholeness of the church. When that happens, 
and in whatever degree it happens, the witness of the church 
is weakened. How can it call men to worship of the one 
God if it is calling to rival shrines? How can it claim to 
bridge the divisions in human society — divisions between 
Greek and barbarian, bond and free, between white and 
black, Aryan and non-Aryan, employer and employed — if, 
when men are drawn into it, they find that another division 


Edinburgh Listens — and Thinks Collectively 99 

has been added to the old ones — a division of Catholic 
from Evangelical, of Episcopalian from Presbyterian or In¬ 
dependent? A church divided in its manifestation to the 
world cannot render its due service to God or to man. 

Dr. Temple pointed out that one does not escape from 
sin by denying its consequences, and Christians cannot heal 
the breaches in the church’s outward unity by regarding 
them as unimportant. To those who made the breaches 
the matters involved seemed worth dying for. They might 
now look back with a calmer wisdom and see how here or 
there a division which occurred could have been avoided 
by a more conciliatory temper and a more synthetic habit 
of mind. But it does not follow that we should now take 
all the divisions as they stand and merely agree to cooperate 
while still maintaining separate organizations. For in prac¬ 
tice those separate organizations are bound to become com¬ 
petitors, however much they wish to cooperate. 

The first great evil of such divisions is that they obscure 
their witness to the one gospel. The second is that through 
the division each party to it loses some spiritual treasure and 
none perfectly represents the balance of truth, so that the 
balance of truth is not presented to the world at all. We 
have left behind us the habit of believing that our own 
tradition is the whole of truth, and now look to see what 
parts of the “ unsearchable riches of Christ ” we have missed 
while others have had them; thus we are learning increas¬ 
ingly one from another. 

In part, the archbishop continued, our progress toward 
unity is due to the needs of the world. It is not the task of 
the church to solve political problems or to devise con¬ 
trivances for mitigating the effects of human sin. But it is 
the church’s task to proclaim that the most oppressive evils 
under which the world groans are the fruit of sin; that only 
by eradication of that sin can these other evils be averted; 


ioo World Chaos or World Christianity 

and that the only redeemer from sin is Jesus Christ, to whom 
we call the world that its sins may be removed and its divi¬ 
sions healed, and that it may find fellowship in him. 

That proclamation, that invitation, we are bound as a 
church to make. But the world asks: “ Have you found 
that fellowship yourselves? Why do your voices sound so 
various? When we pass from words to action, to what are 
you calling us? Is it to one family, gathered round one holy 
table, where your Lord is himself the host who welcomes all 
his guests? You know that it is not so. When we answer 
your united call we have to choose for ourselves to which 
table we will go, for you are yourselves divided in your act 
of deepest fellowship, and by your own traditions hinder 
us from a unity which we are ready to enjoy.” 

What is our answer to that complaint? Is it not true that 
Christians who have lately been converted in heathen lands, 
and even the ordinary lay folk who are rather detached from 
denominational preoccupations, are more ready to come 
together in face of the resurgence of paganism than are the 
leaders of ecclesiastical organizations, intent upon the 
maintenance of their tradition and upon keeping their or¬ 
ganization in being and in working order? If it is true that 
in its deepest nature the church is always one, it is also true 
that today it is the so-called “ churches ” rather than any 
forces of the secular world which prevent that unity from 
being manifest and effective. 

“ I speak,” said the archbishop, “ as a member of one of 
those churches which still maintain barriers against com¬ 
pleteness of union at the table of the Lord. I believe from 
my heart that we of that tradition are trustees for an ele¬ 
ment of truth concerning the nature of the church which 
requires that exclusiveness as a consequence, until this ele¬ 
ment of truth be incorporated with others into a fuller and 
worthier conception of the church than any of us hold to- 


Edinburgh Listens — and Thinks Collectively 101 

day. But I know that our division at this point is the great¬ 
est of all scandals in the face of the world. I know that we 
can only consent to it or maintain it, without the guilt of 
unfaithfulness to the unity of the gospel and of God him¬ 
self, if it is a source to us of spiritual pain and if we are 
striving to the utmost to remove the occasions which now 
bind us as we think to that perpetuation of disunion. It 
should be horrible to us to speak or think of any fellow 
Christians as ‘ not in communion with us.’ God grant that 
we may feel the pain of it, and under that impulsion strive 
the more earnestly to remove all that now hinders us from 
receiving together the one body of the one Lord, that in 
him we may become one body — the organ and vehicle of 
the one Spirit.” 

Continuing, the archbishop said that the ten years which 
have elapsed since the former conference on Faith and Or¬ 
der met at Lausanne have been a time of progressive unifica¬ 
tion. The unions consummated are chiefly, as is natural, 
between churches of similar polity; but there has been also 
a growth of understanding and appreciation among Chris¬ 
tians of deeply sundered traditions. We are entering the 
second world conference with great encouragement from 
what God has done for us since the first. We must rejoice 
in and give thanks for the perpetual growth of other mani¬ 
festations of the una sancta despite its divisions. The sister 
conference at Oxford has profoundly impressed the world; 
and it has approved a method whereby, if we also are led 
to approve it, the una sancta will be provided with a more 
permanent and more effectual means of declaring itself and 
its judgment than at any time for four hundred, perhaps 
for eight hundred, years. We deeply lament the absence 
from this collaboration of the great church of Rome — the 
church which more than any other has known how to speak 
to the nations so that the nations heard. But the assembling 


102 World Chaos or World Christianity 

of two world conferences in one summer is itself a mani¬ 
festation of the una sancta, the holy fellowship of those who 
worship God in Jesus Christ and look to him as the only 
Saviour of the world. Ten years ago our main concern was 
to state our several traditions in such a way that others 
would understand them truly, and that must still be our 
aim. But the divisions which we sought to overcome rose 
from the fact that traditions are just what they are and none 
other; division cannot be healed by the reiterated statement 
of them. We are here, said the archbishop, as representa¬ 
tives of our churches, but unless our churches are ready 
to learn from one another as well as to teach one another 
the divisions will remain. Therefore loyalty to our own 
churches, which have sent us here, will not best be ex¬ 
pressed in a rigid insistence by each upon his own tradi¬ 
tion. Our churches sent us here to confer about our differ¬ 
ences with a view to overcoming them. As representatives 
of those churches each of us must be as ready to learn from 
others where his own tradition was erroneous or defective 
as to show to others its truth and strength. We meet as fel¬ 
low pupils in a school of mutual discipleship. 

Finally, the archbishop urged the delegates never to for¬ 
get that though the purpose of their meeting was to con¬ 
sider the causes of their divisions, yet what made possible 
their meeting was their unity. They could not seek union 
if they did not already possess unity! Those who had noth¬ 
ing in common did not deplore their estrangement. It was 
because they were one in allegiance to one Lord that they 
sought and hoped for the way of manifesting that unity in 
their witness to him before the world. 

The technical work of the conference began immediately 
after the service at St. Giles’. Like all the business sessions 
it was held in the remarkable auditorium of the Assembly 


Edinburgh Listens — and Thinks Collectively 103 

Hall of the Church of Scotland. This is a square room on 
the “ Mound,” with galleries on all four sides, the center 
of the gallery at the front being the royal box — for the king 
of England, although head of the Anglican Church, be¬ 
comes a Presbyterian when he enters Scotland. (If this 
seems curious, you may put beside it the further fact that 
until recently the moderator of the Church of Scotland was 
Dr. Lang, brother of the Church of England’s Archbishop 
of Canterbury!) The seating in the hall is so arranged that 
even on the main floor everyone faces the center, which is 
occupied by a large raised dais and an enclosed area for 
speakers, secretaries, translators and reporters. Thanks to 
the arrangement and the construction of the hall every¬ 
thing that is said, at whatever place, can be heard without 
amplifiers throughout the room, although it seats nearly 
two thousand persons. It is without question one of the 
finest rooms for a large deliberative assembly to be found 
anywhere in the world. 

As the first business session opened the thought of all 
was directed back to 1910, more than a quarter of a century 
ago, when in that same room there met the World Mission¬ 
ary Conference, from which issued more results than from 
any other assembly in the life of the modern church. On 
the platform sat Dr. John R. Mott who, as a relatively 
young man, had been the chairman of that gathering. To¬ 
day he stands among the elder statesmen despite the vigor 
of his mind and the ruggedness of his amazing physique. 
The Archbishop of York, who had been unanimously 
elected chairman of the present conference, referred to the 
fact that as a young student he himself had stood in the 
upper left-hand gallery in those creative days and received 
impressions which had changed his whole life. Particular 
reference was made by many to the American Episcopal 
bishop, Dr. Charles H. Brent, who at that time and in this 


104 World Chaos or World Christianity 

room had been inspired to organize the Faith and Order 
movement for the specific purpose of working toward 
Christian unity in the organic life of the church. Equally 
heart-stirring was it to see the leaders of the many Oriental 
churches united in the National Christian councils which 
have grown up under the administrative genius of Dr. Mott 
and the International Missionary Council — itself a prod¬ 
uct of the 1910 conference. 

Memories and experiences like these dulled the edge of 
the cynical remarks made by some who were overwhelmed 
by the hopelessness of the task before the delegates. Here 
was visible and symbolic evidence that under God’s guid¬ 
ance much had already been done to restore the church’s 
lost unity and to plant the faith firmly in all the known 
world — something which, as Dr. Cavert reminded the 
Oxford Conference, had never before been true in the two 
thousand years of Christian history. 

In anticipation of the tasks to be accomplished commis¬ 
sions had been appointed long in advance of the conference 
to carry on preparatory work in much the same manner as 
for the Oxford Conference. The commissions drew up pre¬ 
liminary reports on the four themes of the conference. 
These were quickly approved by the delegates, who then 
divided into four sections to deal with the themes: the 
Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ; the Church of Christ and 
the Word of God; the Church of Christ — Ministry and 
Sacraments; the Church’s Unity in Life and Worship. To 
the casual reader these may sound like very remote and 
academic themes indeed. But when put into less theologi¬ 
cal language they are seen to cover exactly the questions 
which divide the churches of the world into countless de¬ 
nominations and sects. At the first World Conference on 
Faith and Order in Lausanne in 1927 agreement concern¬ 
ing the church’s message was reached with relative ease. 


Edinburgh Listens — and Thinks Collectively 105 

But on other questions there has been and is no universal 
agreement — questions such as the meaning of our Lord’s 
work in bringing by his “ grace ” new life to sinful man; 
the meaning of the “Word of God” which all churches 
claim to obey but which they define differently; the mean¬ 
ing and the right use of sacraments and an ordained min¬ 
istry; and the meaning of unity itself in the life and worship 
of the church. This fourfold theme, therefore, engaged 
the attention of the conference not by arbitrary choice, 
but because experience had shown that if differences in 
these particulars could be resolved organic reunion would 
be brought within relatively easy reach of practical con¬ 
summation. 

If you ask for a more explicit definition of such a term as 
“ grace ” I would suggest that proposed by Dr. Buckham 
of California, who tells us that grace means “ the free be¬ 
stowal of the love of God through the revealing and redeem¬ 
ing Christ upon undeserving man in response to the exer¬ 
cise of faith awakened by His Spirit.” Perhaps the other 
three themes of the conference do not at the moment need 
further definition. If you stop to consider them you will 
see, I think, that they are far from being merely academic 
or theoretical. Unfortunately theologians, like every other 
professional group in the world, have a technical language 
which the outsider finds very confusing. It is therefore 
necessary when they talk together to have at hand not only 
translators of French, German, Greek, Latin and other lan¬ 
guages, but also interpreters to put their erudite discus¬ 
sions into words which do not look like candidates for a 
crossword puzzle to the ordinary reader — or, for that mat¬ 
ter, to some of their fellows. 

For instance, after a particularly technical theological 
discussion during the latter part of the conference, I over¬ 
heard one Episcopal bishop say to another: “ I went to a 


106 World Chaos or World Christianity 

theological seminary and graduated with honors. I have 
several degrees in theology. I thought I knew something 
about theology, but I don’t know what those chaps were 
talking about! ” This was, however, a very exceptional 
case. Underneath all the technical verbiage the delegates 
at Edinburgh were wrestling with problems of real concern 
to men and women of different traditions and different parts 
of this sadly divided world — problems which simply can¬ 
not be ignored if people are to make intelligent progress 
toward understanding and agreeing with one another. 

It was something of that nature which fell to my lot to 
say at the opening of the regular program of the conference. 
Mr. William Paton of London and I had been asked by the 
chairman to prepare a statement which would make clear 
the relevance of Edinburgh’s undertaking to the world 
situation in which the church must bear its witness. Since 
Mr. Paton deserves more credit by far than I for the final 
form of this statement and since it has a very direct bearing 
upon the work of the conference as a whole I hope I will 
not appear immodest if I quote it here. 

This World Conference on Faith and Order meets at a time 
when throughout the world the hearts of men are burdened 
with perplexity, suffering, and fear of what may yet be coming. 
The years which have passed since the great gathering at Lau¬ 
sanne have proved, if that were needed, how incalculable are 
the affairs of men; the most outstanding events in that period 
— though we are now able to see how far back their causes may 
be traced — are such as none who assembled at Lausanne could 
have foreseen. 

The feature of modern society on which witnesses in virtually 
all countries are agreed is the disintegration of established in¬ 
stitutions, customs and ideas, not only in the spheres of politics 
and economics but also in those of morality and religion. In 
comparison with others there are countries that are still un¬ 
troubled; but even there the forces of change are at work. 
There is widespread dissolution of the spiritual bonds and ac- 


Edinburgh Listens — and Thinks Collectively 107 

cep ted organizing principles which have hitherto controlled 
and given meaning to common life. Among the causes which 
have brought about these effects are to be numbered the rapidly 
increasing ease and speed of intercommunication, bringing to 
the civilization of the East intimate contacts with that of the 
West and to the more primitive races of the world catastrophic 
change; the large-scale character of modern society which has 
for myriads almost destroyed the personal quality of life; the 
menace of war; and the horror of unemployment which de¬ 
stroys a man’s sense of having a place in the world. Deeper 
than these things lies the spiritual insecurity of modern man 
in East and West alike. Old moralities decay because the con¬ 
victions on which they rested are no longer held. Men do not 
know how they want to live, or by what social obligation they 
are willing to be governed; common standards cannot be as¬ 
sumed, men cannot reckon upon their neighbors, the spiritual 
unity of the community is everywhere disturbed. This disinte¬ 
gration is most acute among the primitive peoples, as in Africa, 
but it is present in many Eastern lands, where the conflict be¬ 
tween the old faiths and the new civilization has been serious, 
and it is extensive also in our so-called Christendom, as may 
be most clearly seen in the change in common notions about 
the family and the relations of the sexes. 

But this is only a part of the problem by which the church 
is faced. There is in man an inborn longing for community. 
Along with the tendency to disintegration in established ideas 
and institutions goes another — the tendency to bind society 
together in the acceptance of claims and allegiances that may 
in a strict sense be called absolute. Especially for youth in 
many lands the ideals of freedom, equality and tolerance on 
the one hand, and authority, obedience, and surrender on the 
other, seem mutually exclusive. It is the latter that they choose. 
Not only for the youth but for whole populations is it now true 
that the people, the class, the state, or some other single element 
taken out of the whole of life, is given absolute value; round 
this center of unquestioned authority the life of the commu¬ 
nity is remade. Thus in lands such as Japan, Turkey, Russia, 
Poland, Italy and Germany — to name a few only — powerful 
movements are at work which, making use of the methods 
which political power and modern technique place at their dis¬ 
posal — and above all of education — are trying to build up a 


io8 World Chaos or World Christianity 


new order upon a totalitarian basis. This is the new idolatry 
— a created entity being worshiped in its Creator’s stead. 
Christians must not fail to observe the successes that have been 
won by such methods, and to ask themselves how far their own 
failure in witness has led to the growth of such forms of moral 
leadership; equally they must recognize that because they are 
essentially idolatrous all such forms of life are in the last resort 
incompatible with a belief in the sovereignty of God or with a 
Christian view of the dignity of man, for whom the Lord Jesus 
Christ was content to die. 

This double process whereby a society that has lost its old 
moorings seeks life, meaning and order in obedience to new 
gods, is perhaps the most characteristic feature of our time. 
Of more specific problems it will be enough to mention racial¬ 
ism, economic dislocation and war. 

But it is in the fact of war and the universal fear of impend¬ 
ing war that our civilization most plainly shows its inherent 
disorder and its need of radical cleansing and redemption. The 
years are not many that separate the Western world, and much 
also of the East and of Africa, from the horror that haunts their 
memory. The slaughter of the flower of every people, the poi¬ 
soning of the wells of truth by organized lying, the prostitution 
of religion to national ends — all these things are known and 
remembered, and in every people without any exception there 
is a profound loathing of war and a longing that it may never 
come again. Yet every nation is preparing for it, and those 
that most hate it and are most resolved never to provoke it 
prepare not less resolutely than the rest. Can there ever be 
offered to mankind a plainer proof that the deepest need of all 
is not clear understanding nor technical efficiency, but the re¬ 
newing of the springs of moral life? The thing that we would 
not, that we do. 

It is a striking witness of the perverseness of human nature 
that an epoch of history in which intercourse has become more 
than ever possible between different parts of the world should 
be marked by a growth in the evil of racialism and of national¬ 
ism based upon race. Christians have to consider not only the 
horrors that accompany the color bar in certain countries, or 
the recrudescence of Jew-baiting in so-called Christian lands, 
but the still graver fact that racial barriers, both against the 
non-white man and against the Christian of Jewish blood, are 


Edinburgh Listens — and Thinks Collectively 109 

to be found within the church itself! It should be no matter 
for surprise that the religion of Mohammed can in some lands 
plausibly offer itself to non-white people as the only religion 
in which real equality and brotherhood are possible. The re¬ 
sentment of Eastern races at the aloofness of the white man and 
at his economic and political advantage has long been- keen; 
it is now increased by a diminution in moral regard. 

It is perhaps in the economic sphere that the change in the 
world's thinking is most evident. The accustomed order has 
long been challenged on moral and even on Christian grounds, 
but it achieved a relative efficiency, and that outweighed all 
else. Now, when the paradox of poverty in the midst of an 
attainable plenty is obvious to all, the challenge of the present 
order to the Christian understanding of life is gaining a more 
attentive hearing. This challenge is made in four chief ways. 
The great inequalities which characterize society mean that 
multitudes are denied the necessary conditions for health and 
opportunity which are taken for granted by others; this evil 
is most fully evident in the case of children. The spirit of 
acquisitiveness is — despite all disclaimers — enhanced by the 
system. When a society gives highest honor to those who have 
most wealth it is virtually certain that the scale of values in 
that society will be perverted. Irresponsibility is increased, 
both among those great organizations or powerful individuals 
on whom the whole lives of masses of the people depend, and 
among the poor for whom the economy within which they 
live seems to be subject to no social control. Again, in much 
of modern economic life there is a denial of Christian vocation, 
in the kind of work that many have to do and the conventions 
that surround it, in the fact of unemployment, and in the con¬ 
flict between profit and the public good. 

In such a world the church lives and witnesses. She is faced 
by tasks so tremendous that they can only be undertaken in 
the clear recognition that they are humanly impossible. Yet 
there is no lack of evidence that the promises of God live and 
are strong, and that God is still One that heareth prayer. 

The note of evangelism is heard today throughout the whole 
church more constantly and clearly than was the case in quite 
recent years. Under great differences of form a common move¬ 
ment is to be discerned. Within the German Evangelical 
Church a great spiritual revival is at work. From the Preach- 


no World Chaos or World Christianity 

ing Mission by which so recently a great part of the United 
States of America was moved, to the Indian untouchables pour¬ 
ing into the Christian church, is a far cry, and yet in both alike, 
beneath the vast differences of circumstance, there is the sense 
of need for God in Christ. The Indian untouchable, now 
Christian, who testified, “ Once we were dogs. Only Jesus could 
make men out of us,” was speaking from out of the heart of 
humanity. Two things are true, both that there are in wide 
circles an alertness and desire, a turning to religion to see 
whether after all it may not have the needed word to speak; and 
also that a church which had in some of its parts grown almost 
afraid of evangelism is rediscovering the joy and glory of it. It 
is only when we look at the wide sweep of the church’s work 
all over the world that we can comprehend at all the greatness 
of what is happening. There are great ingatherings in India — 
but in Africa still greater, though so little known. In China, 
where only fifteen years ago a powerful anti-Christian move¬ 
ment swept the country, there is by general consent a great 
turning toward religion, and not least to the Christian re¬ 
ligion. 

It is well to recall such facts — not to dull the edge of that 
self-examination and repentance of which all Christians are 
considerably in need, but that we may take courage and find 
faith in God. If the last century saw a great growth in secular¬ 
ism, it saw also in the missionary movement throughout the 
world the most remarkable expansion of the church in all Chris¬ 
tian history. We forget sometimes how even in the West the 
record is not one of retreat and failure but of large advance. 
Even the deepest suspicion of statistical evidence cannot wholly 
destroy the significance of the fact that at the time of the 
American Revolution only five per cent of the nation were 
counted as members of the churches, while today one half can 
be so counted. 

The church of Christ is not engaged today in the heroic or 
even stoical labor of announcing to the world a gospel that is 
irrelevant to it, scoring here and there little and unimportant 
successes but gaining no ground in the center. It has in trust 
the Truth , and there is no other truth on which mankind can 
live. Those who live without it do not live for the ends which 
God intends, nor as he ordained. Christians may be penitent 
for their sloth and divisions and sensitive to the often ill-adapted 


Edinburgh Listens — and Thinks Collectively m 

methods they employ; they may be aware of hypocrisy and in¬ 
sincerity; but nothing may be allowed to dim the brightness of 
the fact that the heart of the church’s message is not merely 
relevant to the need of the world but is that which alone can 
help and heal. 

Two instances will suffice. There is among good men and 
women of all nations a longing for international brotherhood, 
and much effort has gone into the framing of schemes that 
would help to bring it nearer. But is it remembered, even 
among Christians, what priceless gifts the church brings to 
those who thus seek? For the church is more than interna¬ 
tional. To her the first thing is not the nation, and the unity 
hoped for is not built upon the foundation of separate na¬ 
tions consenting together. To her the unity of mankind is not 
an aspiration but a fact. She begins with the tremendous fact 
of God’s love in Jesus Christ, whereby the life of the church is 
constituted. She knows that rooted in this love there is a fel¬ 
lowship which men do not create but into which they are 
brought. A church that is truly ecumenical and that realizes 
its own universal and supra-national character has priceless 
boons to confer upon the world. It could supply through the 
fact of its own brotherhood some of that community of moral 
conviction which is needed for the support of international law, 
since that law, like the law of a nation, rests upon the basis of a 
common acceptance of moral custom and ideas. 

Again, we have seen already that the modern world, and espe¬ 
cially the younger part of it, wants community. It would pre¬ 
fer to subordinate itself utterly to the claim of the state and of 
race or class rather than be individually free, if that were the 
only choice. What does the church offer? It offers a fellow¬ 
ship with God in Christ and in him with other men; a fel¬ 
lowship dedicated to all the labor of the kingdom of God, an ad¬ 
venture and a labor in which a man may be glad to lose himself. 
It is no selfish individualism, neither pietistic nor moralistic, 
yet a living fellowship of worship, service and sacrifice. But 
it is never less than a fellowship of persons who are infi¬ 
nitely dear to the heart of God and ennobled by the sacrifice of 
Jesus for them. There is a suppression of the individuality 
which is death; there is a losing of the life which is life indeed. 
The true balance of individual and society is to be found in 
the revelation of the redeemed man in. the redeemed commu- 


112 World Chaos or World Christianity 

nity; love the motive to service and love the bulwark of a true 
freedom. 

That the church should in many lands today be persecuted, 
her freedom invaded, her witness inhibited, is perhaps a proof 
that in spite of all her weaknesses she is at the heart of the 
world’s struggle. The fact that Orthodox, Catholic and Prot¬ 
estant churches are alike affected shows that the movement is 
not merely directed against “ clericalism.” It is fundamentally 
about Christianity that men are fighting: Christ and his teach¬ 
ing, particularly his cross, seem to many an offense against 
nationalism. 

It is necessary then to approach the questions of the church’s 
faith and order and of the achievement of her unity with a 
sense of the tragic quality of the time and of the tremendous 
issues that wait — or do not wait — our word. It is not too 
much to say that a divided church — divided as we are divided 
today — is totally unable to offer more than a caricature of the 
gospel. We speak of unity, brotherhood, concord, and renew¬ 
ing power to those who are torn by caste division and color 
prejudices or are meditating on class war — but we cannot over¬ 
come our own rivalries. We offer long-winded explanations 
of our notorious uncharitableness to one another; yet of the 
deep unity which does in fact join Christians together we can 
offer little practical evidence to the world. We know that 
Christian education in national life is threatened more by de¬ 
nominational rivalry than by anything else — the instances of 
weakness and failure that are organically connected with dis¬ 
union could be multiplied a hundredfold. 

Our conference is, then, highly relevant to the time. It may 
be — and often is — thought that any discussion of deep theo¬ 
logical problems is necessarily academic, irrelevant to life. The 
trouble is only that its real relevance is not appreciated! No 
complex process of building can be efficient without the work 
of abstract thought. 

Yet let us beware lest we suffer the presence of the unwhole¬ 
some argument that unity is to be desired in order that the 
church may be efficient and successful, and forget the judg¬ 
ment of God in which we all stand. We are to be, not success¬ 
ful , but obedient. Unity is not the condition of our efficiency; 
it is the form under which we may express the ineffable knowl¬ 
edge of the common life in Christ. Let us therefore approach 


Edinburgh Listens — and Thinks Collectively 113 

these great themes that invite our thought and prayer in a 
spirit of desperate earnestness. The world calls, and that is a 
great and terrible thing; but how much more terrible, how 
poignant, how dread in judgment, how appealing in love, is the 
call of our Lord himself! 

Following this statement a moving plea for unity was 
made by the Right Reverend Dr. V. S. Azariah, bishop of 
Dornakal, an impressive figure in his bright purple cassock. 
Incidentally, though he is an Indian Dr. Azariah speaks 
beautiful English. He began by pointing out that God 
had used the experience of the Christian West to found 
churches all over the world. 

“ We thank you for this ministry, and we thank God for 
you,” he declared, “ but we want you to take us seriously 
when we say that the problem of unity is one of life and 
death for us. Do not give your aid to keep us separate, but 
instead lead us to union, so that you and we may go forward 
together to fulfill the prayer that we may be one.” 

Dr. Azariah stressed the fact that the mission field did 
present the greatest example for Christian unity. The 
goal and hope of Indian Christians, he said, was to see one 
church for India. Out of three hundred and fifty million 
people in India there were only six million Christians, 
while in China the proportion was even less. “ It is neces¬ 
sary for us to form a united front against the anti-Christian 
forces that confront us on every side,” he stated in con¬ 
clusion. 

Certain aspects of the European situation were presented 
by Pasteur Marc Boegner of France when he commented 
on the statement concerning the church’s witness in the 
world today. In the political world, he said, the outstand¬ 
ing fact was the Spanish war and the grave danger with 
which it still threatened Europe. In the economic world 
appeared a heart-rending paradox: depression and wide- 


ii 4 World Chaos or World Christianity 

spread unemployment finding their chief remedy in a new 
armament race. Any sudden stoppage of armament manu¬ 
facture would mean catastrophe for the working classes. 
An internatiofial economic order which would restore the 
possibility of circulation of capital and currency was there¬ 
fore necessary. 

In the spiritual world, Dr. Boegner continued, non¬ 
religious and antireligious faiths were spreading. Idols 
such as the state, the party, the race, the people, were be¬ 
ing substituted for the God of Christianity, and in some 
of the big countries the individual was being absorbed by 
the group or the community. 

“ From the point of view of a dynamic Christianity,” he 
asked, “ what must be the witness which all the churches 
must bear to Jesus Christ in this world, the world which 
we are to keep before our eyes? To ask the question moves 
us at once to humiliation and repentance, and to make clear 
the call to manifest to the world in one faith and one com¬ 
mon consecration the unity of the body of Christ.” 

On this note was completed the first full day’s program. 

Unlike the conference at Oxford, the Edinburgh gath¬ 
ering had very few general sessions during its opening 
week. One advantage of this procedure was that the ses¬ 
sions which did take place stood out very clearly. In the 
morning session on August 4 Dr. Temple made an address 
in which he described the purposes and methods of the 
conference. He indicated that only such decisions on find¬ 
ings as could win unanimous support would be officially 
presented to the churches who had sent delegates. He felt 
that the way to secure a unanimous vote was not to obscure 
any real differences, but rather to bring them out into the 
open — for any unity worth having must do justice to the 
truth contained in all the different traditions. “ Our aim,” 


Edinburgh Listens — and Thinks Collectively 115 

he declared, “ must be to combine loyalty to the truth we 
have ourselves received with readiness to learn also the 
truth which others have received but which we ourselves 
have either missed or failed to appreciate in full.” 

He reminded us that we were not a society for theologi¬ 
cal discussion only. We were to consider also the reasons 
for the churches’ disunion and to find if possible the way 
to union. In all our discussions, therefore, we must keep 
preeminent the question, Are our differences such as need 
hinder the union of those who hold various views in one 
visible church? To illustrate what he meant Dr. Temple 
took the first main theme of the conference, the meaning 
of grace. He thought that if we are allowed to interpret 
for ourselves the great phrase of the Protestant reformers, 
“ Salvation by grace and faith alone,” we would all be pre¬ 
pared to agree to it. If so, need any diverse interpretations 
hold us apart? He thought that any hesitation we might 
feel in answering that question might be due to the very 
sort of misunderstanding which such a conference as we 
were holding could remove. 

In commending the theme of the second section to those 
who were to deal with it, Dr. Temple said that the problem 
of the relation of the church to the Word of God — as 
well as that of the relation of the ministry and sacraments 
to the life of the church, the theme of Section III — in¬ 
volved discussion of a question whose answer people assume 
is self-evident; namely, What is the nature of the church? 
The ten years since the Lausanne Conference had per¬ 
suaded him, he said, that this was really the central ques¬ 
tion. To answer it every Christian of whatever denomina¬ 
tion would naturally turn to the biblical record which tells 
how our Lord, by the triumph of the cross and by the act 
of God in his resurrection, fashioned a new community, 
the people of the new covenant, who by the power of the 


n 6 World Chaos or World Christianity 


Spirit are incorporated in the living Christ so as to be his 
body in the world. If this simple statement of the origin 
of the Christian church was accepted, it would become 
clear, the archbishop thought, that the relation of the 
church to the Word of God is twofold: 

First, the church is created by the Word of God; but second, 
the church’s life is itself an utterance of that Word. For 
the Word of God is a fount of fellowship, even as fellowship is 
the characteristic manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Conse¬ 
quently redemption is from the antagonisms of the world into 
the fellowship of disciples; and this is the church. That is why 
the church — the fellowship of the redeemed — is part of its 
own message and even appears in the creed as an object of its 
own faith. This, after all, is only another way of saying that 
true love of God must needs unite us in love for one another. 

Similarly when we turn to the subject of Section III, we have 
to ask whether the nature of the church itself is such that its 
structure is vitally relevant to its function, or whether its struc¬ 
ture is to be determined from time to time by considerations 
of practical utility. Or, to put it otherwise, are the sacraments 
special expressions of a sacramental character inherent in the 
life of the church itself, so that there is an intimate relation be¬ 
tween their essential nature and the visible order of the church? 
Or are they only the expressions of the sacramental principle, 
so that no outward order in the church has any special rele¬ 
vance to their significance and efficiency? 

Two other important considerations the archbishop felt 
should be kept in view throughout the conference: First, 
the fact that many of the different views are not antagon¬ 
istic but really complement one another; second, the desir¬ 
ability of approaching as learners such differences as do 
seem to be irreconciliable. If we believe, as we must, that 
there is truth in our own tradition, let us remember that 
there is truth also in those traditions which others hold 
and which may seem incompatible with our own. Since 
truth is one, any seeming incompatibility must be due to 


Edinburgh Listens — and Thinks Collectively 117 

our misapprehension. When we find the truth we will 
inevitably realize our essential oneness, hidden from us 
now because of our partial understanding. “ We shall 
hear one another,” the archbishop concluded, “ not with 
any wish to refute but always with the wish to appreciate. 
Above all we shall be listening to the voice of the one Lord, 
the head of the body wherein we are all members, that he 
may teach us the truth which shall unite us all.” 

After the sessions which I have briefly described the con¬ 
ference as a whole met only occasionally until the four 
sections were ready to begin reporting the results of their 
discussions. But services of worship for all delegates and 
visitors took place every day, usually in St. Giles’ Cathedral. 
Here, as at the services in St. Mary’s at Oxford, the unity of 
heart and spirit which was experienced tended to soften 
the intellectual and temperamental differences which in¬ 
evitably emerged in the work of the conference. Indeed 
it was here that all of us sensed what lay deeper than words 
or clearly definable ideas — that there already exists a 
unity of the church which is the gift of God, a unity whose 
outward manifestation we all are seeking if we give heed 
to the significance of our Lord’s thrice repeated prayer 
that his followers should be one in him and one with him 
in the Father. Thus under varied leadership, Catholic 
and Protestant, liturgical and nonliturgical, through music 
and prayer and silence, we were brought into a fellowship 
so complete that it answered our deepest yearnings. And 
as I became more and more fully aware of the oneness that 
underlies our external differences in the church, I said to 
myself — and others must have had the same thought — 
“ If only we had on a wide scale what we have here in this 
company of Christian men and women from all over the 
world we should actually possess that for which the divided 


118 World Chaos or World Christianity 

church waits and without which the world will not be¬ 
lieve — that which Christ died to bring.” Particularly did 
this thought arise on the occasion when the members of 
the conference partook of communion at St. Giles’ after 
the rite of the Scottish Presbyterian Church. 

The process of group discussion and drafting which oc¬ 
cupied the bulk of the time at Edinburgh can be described 
only in general terms and illustrated only in a few repre¬ 
sentative instances. The authorities of the university had 
generously put at our disposal the classrooms of New Col¬ 
lege, and the conference was obliged to use a great many of 
them as its four sections broke up into numerous sub¬ 
sections. Through skillful management practically all the 
delegates were enabled to take actual part in the work, as 
they had done at Oxford. Again it was a case of coopera¬ 
tive thinking on a large scale, directed by able leaders to 
the points where it was by common consent most needed 
and kept away from irrelevant matters. 

The leaders of the four main sections were the following: 

Section I — The Grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ 

Chairman — Bishop Lehtonen, Evangelical Church of Fin¬ 
land 

Vice-chairman — The Rev. Dr. W. F. Lofthouse, Method¬ 
ist Church of Great Britain 

Reporter — The Rev. Professor William Manson, Church 
of Scotland, Edinburgh 


Section II — The Church of Christ and the Word of 
God 

Chairman — The Rev. Dr. G. W. Richards, Evangelical 
and Reformed Church, United States 


Edinburgh Listens — and Thinks Collectively 119 

Vice-Chairman — Dr. H. G. Wood, Society of Friends, 
Birmingham, England 

Reporter — The Rev. G. A. Ankar, Church of Sweden 

Section III — The Church of Christ — Ministry and 
Sacraments 

Chairman — The Rev. Professor D. M. Baillie, Church of 
Scotland, St. Andrews 

Vice-chairman — The Rev. Professor Hamilcar Alivisatos, 
Greek Orthodox Church 
Reporter — The Bishop of Gloucester 

Section IV — The Church’s Unity in Life and Worship 

Chairman — The Rev. M. E. Aubrey, Baptist Church, 
Moderator of the Federal Council of the 
Free Churches of England 

Vice-chairman — The Rev. Francis Cho-Min Wei, Angli¬ 
can Church in China 

Reporter — The Rev. Dean W. L. Sperry, Congregational 
Church, United States 

What each of these sections had to say will appear, at 
least in part, in the chapter entitled “ Edinburgh Speaks.” 

Especially memorable among the activities of the Edin¬ 
burgh Conference were two Sunday evening meetings of a 
kind all too unusual. One could hope that they might be 
widely duplicated throughout the church. At these meet¬ 
ings certain members of the conference were asked to tell 
in simple, direct language what the experience of Christian 
life within their communions had meant to them person¬ 
ally. Seven widely different points of view were thus pre¬ 
sented in an atmosphere of intense and sympathetic in- 


120 World Chaos or World Christianity 

terest. Particularly marked was the appreciation shown 
the statements made by an English Quaker, Carl Heath; 
a British Anglican, Lord Robert Cecil; a prominent 
leader of the Greek Orthodox Church, Professor Alivisa- 
tos; and the moderator of the United Church of South 
India, Principal C. J. Lucas. Wider divergence of origin, 
theology, church theory and practice it would be difficult 
to find. Here were a Friend who believed in no outward 
symbols or sacraments; an Episcopalian who cherished the 
liturgical expressions of his highly formal communion; 
a Greek Catholic whose church shared the love of mysticism 
of the ancient East; and a nonconfessional Protestant who 
had himself been successively a member of the Lutheran, 
Reformed, Congregational and “ United ” churches and 
whose wife was of Anglican and Roman Catholic back¬ 
ground. 

In very characteristic ways all revealed the vitality of the 
same great religious experience and bore eloquent testi¬ 
mony to the fact that despite the differences of race, cul¬ 
ture, tradition and education which separated them — not 
to mention the great contrast between their respective 
branches of the church — they were nevertheless one in a 
sense which might escape definition but which could not 
be denied by any who heard and understood their words. 
Perhaps the impression on me was the deeper for the fact 
that I have had the good fortune of knowing all these men 
personally and of seeing in their activity the genuineness 
of their devotion to our Lord. But I am sure that even to 
strangers they must have brought the same conviction, if 
in a lesser degree. Indeed I heard comments which defi¬ 
nitely indicated that this was so. 

Many messages from all parts of the world, both from 
individuals and churches, were of course received by the 


Edinburgh Listens — and Thinks Collectively 121 

Edinburgh Conference. Two were of such unusual inter¬ 
est and significance that I must mention them especially. 
The first was from the head of the Benedictine — Roman 
Catholic — priory of Amay-sur-Meuse in Belgium, who 
addressed to Canon Hodgson, the conference secretary, 
and through him to the conference itself, a warm, friendly 
letter of good will expressing his regret that his own com¬ 
munion was not officially represented and his heartfelt 
prayer that God would make plain to all the way to ulti¬ 
mate unity in one visible and universal church. “ Though 
we are absent from Edinburgh,” he concluded, “ we are 
with you in heart.” In somewhat similar vein Dr. A. J. 
McDonald, Roman Catholic archbishop of St. Andrews 
and Edinburgh, wrote to the conference, adding that he 
hoped to meet personally with the delegates of the non- 
Roman churches. 

To both these letters the conference authorized its chair¬ 
man, Dr. Temple, to reply. Part of the reply, which was 
approved by the delegates, declares: “It has been a great 
sorrow to us that we have not had the fellowship and 
assistance of our Roman Catholic brethren in our enter¬ 
prise and labors. We are both moved and encouraged by 
the knowledge that your prayers are joined with ours that 
we may be guided by the Holy Spirit as we seek to learn 
from God his will for ourselves and for his whole church.” 

Those who know the tragic bitterness of the struggle 
waged for four centuries between the Roman and the 
Protestant communions in Europe will not fail to see in 
such an exchange of friendly messages at least the first faint 
glimmering of the dawn of a better day. 


V 

EDINBURGH SPEAKS 


I f the Oxford Conference found it difficult to formulate 
its reports and gain their acceptance, the Edinburgh 
Conference found it even more difficult. Edinburgh had 
to decide what it might say with entire unanimity, for con¬ 
cerning the many differences it must say only what all could 
agree to. At times during the week or more when the 
sections were wrestling with their problems many felt dis¬ 
couraged and uncertain. Could any worth-while agree¬ 
ment be reached? I recall meeting a friend who had just 
come from a discussion of this kind and looked a bit de¬ 
pressed. “ Are you making any progress? ” I asked. “ Oh, 
I suppose so,” he replied. “ We add a new adverb about 
* once every two hours! ” 

But when the reports began to come before the full 
conference for discussion and acceptance — or rejection — 
the tide definitely turned. It was such a surprise for many 
to find any agreement possible that they reacted literally 
like the youth delegate who confessed, when some member 
of a very different communion expressed a view in which 
he could concur, that he felt sure he must have misunder¬ 
stood him. 

The debates on each report were long and careful. If 
anything, they were fuller than those at Oxford, and 
greater divergencies appeared. Yet one by one the final 
forms of statement were arrived at — not by watering down 
and denaturing the product, but by patient search for the 
kernel of truth which all felt must be hidden in the meas- 


122 


Edinburgh Speaks 


123 

ure of meal ground by the slow turning of ecclesiastical 
mills. Many of the debates were brilliant. The pages of 
the excellent Edinburgh newspapers bore testimony to 
that fact in column after column of verbatim reports which 
theology-loving Scots doubtless devoured in toto. 

It is difficult, indeed dangerous, to try to summarize the 
reports. They really need to be read in their full form; 
to alter the wording of any of them might be to distort or 
misrepresent their meaning. It is to be hoped that readers 
of this account will get the reports in full, as indeed all 
serious friends of Christian unity should do. In what 
follows, then, will be included only the introductory por¬ 
tion of the full report, representative excerpts of the reports 
of the first three sections, and large parts of the report of 
the fourth, which has particular relevance to the thinking 
and acting of all Christians, whether they be theologically 
inclined or not. 

The introduction is in the form of a review of ten years’ 
progress in church union and was written by Dr. H. Paul 
Douglass, secretary of the Commission on Christian Unity 
of the American Federal Council of Churches. 

Looking back to the first great Conference on Faith and 
Order held in Lausanne in 1927, we thankfully recognize the 
real progress made since then in the field of church union. 

Its detailed history is written in the book by Dr. H. Paul 
Douglass, A Decade of Objective Progress in Church Unity, 
1927-36, which was prepared for us under the direction of the 
Commission on the Church’s Unity in Life and Worship. We 
cannot better open this report than by offering a factual sum¬ 
mary of the most important steps taken during the last ten 
years in every continent of the world. 

The specific unions or approaches to union which the dec¬ 
ade has witnessed have sometimes concerned churches in dif¬ 
ferent nations, as, for example, those between the Anglican 
communion on the one side and the Old Catholic churches 
of Europe and the churches of the Orthodox communion on 


124 World Chaos or World Christianity 

the other; but they have generally been confined to churches 
within their several nations. A special complication has been 
experienced in connection with mutual approaches among 
the younger churches, particularly in the Orient and in Africa, 
the control of which still rests partially with parent churches 
in the older Christian lands. 

The total number of active unity movements is impressive. 
Nearly half of them have occurred in North America, a fact 
which reflects the exceptionally large number of previous divi¬ 
sions needing to be healed. And nearly as many are to be 
found in Asia as in Europe, a fact to be explained in part by 
the immense pressure of non-Christian civilizations which 
forces the churches together, and in part by the practical neces¬ 
sities of the situation. The majority of the unions achieved 
have thus occurred between churches not previously sundered 
by the profounder differences of theological or cultural tradi¬ 
tion; so that, in the main, unity has as yet been fully reached 
only in the easier situations. 

Moreover, the group of movements toward unity which 
marks the period represents very different stages of progress. 
Some have only reached the stage of vague or tentative ex¬ 
ploration. Others have gone as far as definite negotiations re¬ 
garding terms and conditions of union. Still others, having 
come to the point of formal decision, have suffered indefinite 
postponement, as is the case with the Church of Scotland and 
the Church of England. Some have even had to be abandoned. 
A somewhat larger number has been consummated. It is a 
matter for great satisfaction to be able to record that all unions 
which have been in existence long enough to be tested have 
been distinctly successful in the eyes of those primarily con¬ 
cerned. 

The schemes attempted illustrate all the usual meanings of 
the word unity. Some schemes have sought and some have 
secured mutual recognition between churches, and thus have 
laid the basis for intercommunion. As an example of the 
agreement to establish full communion we may quote the dis¬ 
cussions between the Anglican communion and Old Catholic 
churches. Fruitful negotiations of a similar kind have been 
initiated between the Anglican communion and the churches 
of Finland, Latvia and Esthonia. Other churches have been 
content with more or less complete federation. About three- 


Edinburgh Speaks 


125 


quarters of all the cases recorded, however, have contemplated 
the actual corporate union of two or more previously separate 
bodies. This is exemplified in such conspicuous instances as 
the reunion of the Scottish Presbyterian churches in 1929 and 
that of the English Methodists in 1932, the union of the 
churches of Canada in 1925, the coming together of certain 
churches in northern and in southern India, the formation of 
the church of Christ in China in 1927 combining Baptist, Con¬ 
gregational, Methodist, Presbyterian and Reformed churches, 
United Brethren, the United Church of Canada and independ¬ 
ent Chinese churches of six English-speaking nations. There 
are to be borne in mind also the contemplated unions of the 
French Reformed churches and of the chief Methodist churches 
of the United States. All these cases significantly change former 
ecclesiastical structure and constitute single churches where 
several existed before. 

Many of the great denominational types of churches repre¬ 
sented in the Faith and Order movement have been involved 
in these recent developments. Some have been primarily in¬ 
terested in the realization of a particular form or kind of unity. 
Others have limited themselves to the uniting of bodies of the 
same religious type and tradition. But highly significant unions 
in the United States, Canada and China have brought into 
single communions churches of very divergent traditions and 
polity; so that the record of the immediate past does not suggest 
any necessity for waiting upon unions of denominational fami¬ 
lies before wider union is attempted. 

Obviously any estimate of the very varied forms of mutual 
approach depends upon the kind of unity one believes to be 
important and on the true objective. Schemes of a denomina¬ 
tional kind might in some cases prove in a few years’ time to 
have strengthened confessional consciousness and so to have 
postponed ecumenical union by widening the gulfs between the 
large churches thus created. Some may see in most of the re¬ 
cent movements only minor cases mainly remedying, on a 
local or regional scale, certain practical disadvantages of dis¬ 
union. Intercommunion has not been widely extended during 
the decade; and no union has been consummated between a 
church of radically “ catholic ” tradition and one of radically 
“ evangelical ” tradition. While, then, the significance of the 
progress made must not be overstated, the trend toward unity 


126 World Chaos or World Christianity 


is nevertheless marked both in magnitude and in character. It 
is widespread throughout the world. It occurs in a wide va¬ 
riety of forms. It is vital, relevant to actual situations. It is 
making increasing appeal to the heart and conscience of all 
Christian men. 

THE REPORTS OF THE SECTIONS 
I. THE GRACE OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST * 

With deep thankfulness to God for the spirit of unity, which 
by his gracious blessing upon us has guided and controlled all 
our discussions, we agree on the following statement and rec¬ 
ognize that there is in connection with the subject committed to 
our section no ground for maintaining division between 
churches. 


The Meaning of Grace 

When we speak of God’s grace, we think of God himself as 
revealed in his Son Jesus Christ. The meaning of divine grace 
is truly known only to those who know that God is love, and 
that all that he does is done in love in fulfillment of his right¬ 
eous purposes. His grace is manifested in our creation and 
preservation and in all the blessings of this life, but above all 
in our redemption through the life, death and resurrection of 
Jesus Christ, in the sending of the holy and life-giving Spirit, in 
the fellowship of the church and in the gift of the Word and 
sacraments. 

Man’s salvation and welfare have their source in God alone, 
who is moved to his gracious activity toward man not by any 
merit on man’s part, but solely by his free, outgoing love. 


Justification and Sanctification 

Faith is more than intellectual acceptance of the revelation 
in Jesus Christ; it is wholehearted trust in God and his promises 
and committal of ourselves to Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord. 


Statements of agreement are italicized. 





Edinburgh Speaks 


127 


The Sovereignty of God and Man's Response 

In regard to the relation of God’s grace and man’s freedom, 
we all agree simply on the basis of Holy Scripture and Chris¬ 
tian experience that the sovereignty of God is supreme. By 
the sovereignty of God we mean his all-controlling, all-em¬ 
bracing will and purpose revealed in Jesus Christ for each man 
and for all mankind. And we wish further to insist that this 
eternal purpose is the expression of God’s own loving and holy 
nature. Thus we men owe our whole salvation to his gracious 
will. But, on the other hand, it is the will of God that his 
grace should be actively appropriated by man’s own will and 
that for such decision man should remain responsible. 

Many theologians have made attempts on philosophical 
lines to reconcile the apparent antithesis of God’s sovereignty 
and man’s responsibility, but such theories are not part of the 
Christian faith. 

We are glad to report that in this difficult matter we have 
been able to speak with a united voice, so that we have found 
that here there ought to be no ground for maintaining any di¬ 
vision between churches. 


The Church and Grace 

We agree that the church is the body of Christ and the blessed 
company of all faithful people, whether in heaven or on earth, 
the communion of saints. 


Grace, the Word, and the Sacraments 

We agree that the Word and the sacraments are gifts of God 
to the church through Jesus Christ for the salvation of mankind. 
In both the grace of God in Christ is shown forth, given, and 
through faith received; and this grace is one and indivisible. 


Among or within the churches represented by us there is 
a certain difference of emphasis placed upon the Word and the 
sacraments, but we agree that such a difference need not be a 
barrier to union. 





128 World Chaos or World Christianity 


Sola Gratia (By Grace Alone) 

The phrase, " sola gratia ” has been the subject of much con¬ 
troversy. Some churches set great value on the phrase while 
others avoid it, but we can all join in the following statement: 
Our salvation is the gift of God and the fruit of his grace. It 
is not based on the merit of man, but has its root and founda¬ 
tion in the forgiveness which God in his grace grants to the 
sinner whom he receives to sanctify him. We do not, however, 
hold that the action of the divine grace overrides human free¬ 
dom and responsibility; rather, it is only as response is made 
by faith to divine grace that true freedom is achieved. Resist¬ 
ance to the appeal of God’s outgoing love spells not freedom, 
but bondage, and perfect freedom is found only in complete 
conformity with the good and acceptable and perfect will of 
God. 


II. THE CHURCH OF CHRIST AND THE WORD OF GOD 

The Word of God 

We concur in affirming that the Word of God is ever living 
and dynamic and inseparable from God's activity. “ In the 
beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the 
Word was God.” God reveals himself to us by what he does, 
by that activity by which he has wrought the salvation of men 
and is working for their restoration to personal fellowship 
with himself. 


We are at one in asserting the uniqueness and supremacy 
of the revelation given in Christ, the second person of the 
Holy Trinity; in his name alone salvation is offered to the 
world. But when we turn from this to the question whether 
we can come to know God through other and partial revela¬ 
tions we find differences which demand further study and dis¬ 
cussion. None of us holds that there is a revelation outside 
Christ which can be put on the same level as the revelation in 
Christ. But while many are prepared to recognize a praepa- 
ratio evangelica not only in Hebrew but also in other religions, 
and believe that God makes himself known in nature and in 
history, others hold that the only revelation which the church 



Edinburgh Speaks 


129 

can know and to which it should witness is the revelation in 
Jesus Christ as contained in both the Old and New Testaments. 

Holy Scripture and Tradition 


We are at one in recognizing that the church, enlightened by 
the Holy Spirit, has been instrumental in the formation of the 
Bible. 

But some of us hold that this implies that the church under 
the guidance of the Spirit is entrusted with the authority to 
explain, interpret and complete the teaching of the Bible, 
and consider the witness of the church as given in tradition as 
equally authoritative with the Bible itself. Others, however, 
believe that the church, having recognized the Bible as the 
indispensable record of the revealed Word of God, is bound 
exclusively by the Bible as the only rule of faith and practice 
and, while accepting the relative authority of tradition, would 
consider it authoritative only in so far as it is founded upon 
the Bible itself. 

We all agree that the Christian church is constituted by the 
eternal Word of God made man in Christ and is always vital¬ 
ized by his Holy Spirit. On the other hand, the divine task 
given to the church is to proclaim and bear witness to this 
Word throughout the world by its preaching, its worship and 
its whole life. 


The Church: Our Common Faith 

We are at one in confessing belief in the Holy Catholic 
Church. We acknowledge that through Jesus Christ, particu¬ 
larly through the fact of his resurrection, of the gathering of 
his disciples round their crucified, risen and victorious Lord, 
and of the coming of the Holy Ghost, God’s almighty will 
constituted the church on earth. 

The church is the people of the new covenant, fulfilling and 
transcending all that Israel under the old covenant foreshad¬ 
owed. It is the household of God, the family in which the 
fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man are to be 
realized in the children of his adoption. It is the body of 
Christ, whose members derive their life and oneness from their 
one living Head; and thus it is nothing apart from him, but 



130 World Chaos or World Christianity 

is in all things dependent upon the power of salvation which 
God has committed to his Son. 


Even though men often prove faithless, Christ will remain 
faithful to the promise of his presence, and will so continue 
till the consummation of all things. 

In their apprehension of this faith different persons lay a 
different emphasis on one or another aspect. Some lay greater 
stress on the perpetual and abiding presence of Christ in his 
body and with his people, while others lay greater stress on the 
fact that Christ is present only where his word is truly preached 
and received by faith. 

A point to be studied is in what degree the Christian ulti¬ 
mately depends for his assurance that he is in vital touch with 
Christ upon the possession of the ministry and sacraments, 
upon the Word of God in the church, upon the inward testi¬ 
mony of the Holy Spirit, or upon all of these. 

The Church: Agreements and Differences 


Different churches differ in their use of the term “church.” 
Some would apply the term not only to the visible redeemed 
and redemptive community, but also to the invisible company 
of the fully redeemed; for only when the word is used in this 
sense would it be right to say, “ extra ecclesiam nulla salus ” 
— outside the church there is no salvation. But the invisible 
church is no ideal platonic community distinct from the visible 
church on earth. The invisible church and the visible church 
are inseparably connected though their limits are not exactly 
coterminous. Others regard the use of the term “ church,” with 
reference to this invisible company of true Christians known 
only to God, as misleading and unscriptural. To speak of this 
invisible body as the true church conveys the disastrous sug¬ 
gestions that the true church need not be visible and that the 
visible church need not be true. We all, however, recognize 
that the number of those whom God has brought into newness 
of life and joy in the Holy Ghost, and who have made personal 
response to the forgiving love of God, has limits hidden from 
human vision and known only to God. 




Edinburgh Speaks 


131 

Different churches hold different views as to the basis of 
church membership. Some would hold that all who have been 
baptized and have not by deed or word repudiated their herit¬ 
age belong to the church and are to be regarded as members. 
Others would confine membership to those who have made 
an open profession of faith in Christ and in whose lives some 
measure of the spirit of Christ may be discerned. 


The Church and the Kingdom 

The gospel of Jesus Christ bears witness to the reality both of 
the church and of the kingdom of God. 


Agreeing in this faith we are not yet of one mind about (a) 
the relationship of the church to the kingdom, and ( b ) the ex¬ 
tent to which the kingdom is made known here and now. 

Some stress the kinship between the church and the king¬ 
dom, others the distinction between them. Some lay emphasis 
on the actual presence of the kingdom within the church and 
the continuity of the two, holding that the coming of the 
kingdom can be seen in the progress of the church in this world 
and the work wrought through believers, or even through all 
men of good will the world over. Others lay emphasis on the 
kingdom that is to come in glory; and others again think of 
the kingdom as the ever increasing reign of the righteousness 
and the love of God as manifested in Jesus Christ in every 
realm of life. 

Again, some hold that the progress of the kingdom can 
already be seen in this world; others hold that the church knows 
the kingdom by faith only, since the victory of Christ is still 
hidden from the world and is destined to remain hidden until 
the end of this age. 

In some churches these differing conceptions are felt to be 
of great moment and act as a barrier to full intercourse, while 
in others they form no such obstacle but are held side by side 
without interfering with complete communion. 

The Function of the Church 

The function of the church is to glorify God in adoration 
and sacrificial service and to be God’s missionary to the world. 




132 World Chaos or World Christianity 

She is to bear witness to God’s redeeming grace in Jesus Christ 
in her corporate life, to proclaim the good news to every crea¬ 
ture and to make disciples of all nations, bringing Christ’s 
commandments to communities as well as to individuals. 


The church must proclaim the righteousness of God as 
revealed in Jesus Christ and thus encourage and guide her 
members to promote justice, peace and good will among all 
men and through the whole extent of life. The church is thus 
called to do battle against the powers of evil and to seek the 
glory of God in all things, looking to the day when his king¬ 
dom shall come in the fullness of its power. 

The Gift of Prophecy and the Ministry of the Word 

We are agreed that the presence and inspiration of the Holy 
Spirit are granted to his chosen instruments today, and especi¬ 
ally to those called to be ministers of the word of God. Not 
only in the corporate life and the teaching of the church as 
a whole, but in each of its members according to his ability 
and calling, the Holy Spirit has come to dwell. Indeed all 
perfect and abiding revelation given to us in Christ our Lord 
would certainly have perished from the world had there been 
no inspired men to record it and to preach it in every age. 
This revelation does not belong only to the past; it is also an 
ever present word by which God speaks directly to the listening 
soul. 


Una Sancta and Our Divisions 

Everything which the New Testament teaches concerning 
the church presupposes its essential unity. But we, as we con¬ 
fess our faith in the one church, are conscious of a profound 
cleavage between that faith and the conditions of the present 
time. 

We acknowledge that all who accept Jesus Christ as Son of 
God and their Lord and Saviour, and realize their dependence 
upon God’s mercy revealed in him, have in that fact a super¬ 
natural bond of oneness which subsists in spite of divergences 
in defining the divine mystery of the Lord. We rejoice that 
this sense of kinship is now drawing Christians nearer to one 




Edinburgh Speaks 


133 

another, and that in many partial ways a foretaste of full fellow¬ 
ship between severed communions is even now being sought 
and found. 

But we believe that the divisions of Christendom in every 
land are such as to hamper the manifestation of the unity of 
Christ’s body. We deplore this with all our hearts; and we 
desire that this conference should summon members of the 
churches to such penitence that not only their leaders, but 
the ordinary men and women who hear their message, may 
learn that the cause of Christian unity is implicit in God’s 
word, and should be treated by the Christian conscience as an 
urgent call from God. 

The Communion of Saints 


Any conception of the communion of saints which is con¬ 
fined to the church on earth alone is defective. Many see in 
the communion of saints an affirmation of the unbroken com¬ 
munion between the living and departed in Christ. They be¬ 
lieve themselves to be in communion with the departed and 
express this in their worship. They rejoice to think that there 
is a growing consciousness among Christians of the nearness 
to the redeemed of the unseen world, refusing to believe that 
death severs the communion of those on earth with those 
departed. 

For some it is sufficient to leave their departed ones with 
God, being linked with them through Christ. Others regard 
it as a Christian privilege and duty to pray for the departed. 
Still others, conscious of the living presence, guardianship, and 
help of the saints, ask their prayers before God. 

We all agree that we ought to remember with thankfulness 
those who as followers of Christ witnessed a good confession in 
their day and generation, thereby winning victories for Christ 
and his kingdom. 

We wish to make it clear that “ the communion which the 
saints have with Christ does not make them in any wise par¬ 
takers of the substance of his Godhead, or to be equal with 
Christ in any respect.” In no circumstances should the cherish¬ 
ing of this doctrine veil or shadow the sufficient and only 
mediatorship of Jesus Christ as our Lord and Redeemer. Nei- 



134 World Chaos or World Christianity 

ther must this honoring of the saints descend to superstition 
or abuse. 

A right understanding of the doctrine of the communion 
of saints will help us to realize more vividly that we are in this 
life members one of another and that “ we are come into Mount 
Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusa¬ 
lem, and to an innumerable company of angels, to the general 
assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in 
heaven, and to God the judge of all, and to the spirits of just 
men made perfect, and to Jesus the mediator of the new cove¬ 
nant.” (Heb. 12: 22-24.) 

III. THE CHURCH OF CHRIST — MINISTRY AND SACRAMENTS 

The Authority for the Sacraments 

We are agreed that in all sacramental doctrine and practice 
the supreme authority is our Lord Jesus Christ himself. 

All the churches have based their sacramental doctrine and 
order upon their belief that, according to the evidence of the 
New Testament, the sacraments which they accept were in¬ 
stituted by Christ himself. We are agreed that baptism and 
the Lord's Supper occupied from the beginning a central po¬ 
sition in the church's common life, and take their origin from 
what was said and done by Jesus during his life on earth. Sac¬ 
ramental teaching and practice, therefore, are rightly founded 
upon the record of the New Testament. 

The sacraments are Christ's gifts to his church, which is 
not a static society but a living and growing organism and com¬ 
munion, guided by the Holy Spirit into all truth. 


The Number of the Sacraments 


Most of us agree that the question of the number of the 
sacraments should not be regarded as an insurmountable di¬ 
viding line when we strive to attain to a united church. The 
divergence between the practice of the Society of Friends and 
that of other churches admittedly presents serious difficulties, 
but we trust that even here the Holy Spirit will show us his 
will. 




Edinburgh Speaks 


135 


Validity 

We agree that the sacraments practiced hy any Christian 
church which believes itself to be observing what Christ ap¬ 
pointed for his church are means of grace to those who partake 
of them with faith. 

Confusion has sometimes been introduced by the use of the 
term “ valid ” in the following senses: (a) It is sometimes used 
synonymously with “ efficacious,” so that the term “ invalid ” 
would imply that a sacrament has no spiritual value and is 
not a means of grace. ( b ) It is sometimes used to imply that 
the sacrament has been correctly performed. 

In so far as Christians find themselves obliged by loyalty to 
Christ and to his church to judge that the sacraments prac¬ 
ticed by other Christians are invalid, or doubtfully valid, 
they should, in the cause of Christian truth and charity, do 
all in their power to see that the precise meaning of their judg¬ 
ment, and the grounds on which they are obliged to make it, are 
clearly understood. 

Many of us are of the opinion, and desire to record our 
belief, that although it is the duty of a church to secure that 
sacraments should be performed regularly and canonically, 
yet no judgment should be pronounced by any church denying 
the “ validity ” of the sacraments performed by any Christian 
church which believes itself to be observing what Christ ap¬ 
pointed for his church. 


We believe that every sacrament should be so ordered that 
all may recognize in it an act performed on behalf of the uni¬ 
versal church. 

To this end there is need of an ordained ministry recognized 
by all to act on behalf of the universal church in the administra¬ 
tion of the sacraments. 


Baptism 

The reunited church will observe the rule that all members 
of the visible church are admitted by baptism, which is a gift 
of God's redeeming love to the church, and, administered in 
the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, is a sign 




136 World Chaos or World Christianity 

and seal of Christian discipleship in obedience to our Lord's 
command. 


A note appended by the Baptist delegates is as follows: As 
regards the above statement which has been passed by their 
brethren who practice infant baptism, the Baptists of this sec¬ 
tion could accept it as applying to the baptism of believers, 
i.e., of those who are capable of making a personal confession 
of faith. In practicing the baptism of believers only, they hold 
that they are maintaining the practice of baptism as it is found 
in the New Testament and in the apostolic church, and also 
the principle which is laid down on page 27 of the report of 
Commission III to this effect, viz.: “ The necessary condition of 
receiving the grace of a sacrament is the faith of the recipient.” 
They believe that children belong to God and that no rite is 
needed to assure his grace for them. This statement of the 
Baptists was accepted also by a representative of the Disciples of 
Christ on behalf of that body. 

The Eucharist 

We all believe that Christ is truly present in the eucharist, 
though we may differ as to how that presence is manifested and 
realized. 


We believe if sacrifice is understood, as it was by our Lord 
and his followers and in the early church, it includes not his 
death only, but the obedience of his earthly ministry and his 
risen and ascended life, which is still a life of obedience and of 
service, as it is of intercession for us. Such a sacrifice can never 
be repeated, but is proclaimed and set forth in the eucharistic 
action of the whole church when we come to God in Christ 
at the eucharist or Lord’s Supper. For us the secret of joining 
in that sacrifice is both the worship and the service of God; 
corporate, because we are joined to Christ and in him to each 
other (/ Cor. io:ij) ; individual, because each one of us makes 
the corporate act of self-oblation his own; and not ceremonial 
only, but also profoundly ethical, because the keynote of all 
sacrifice and offering is “ Lo! I come to do thy will, O God. ” 
We believe also that the eucharist is a supreme moment of 




Edinburgh Speaks 


137 

prayer, because the Lord is the celebrant or minister for us at 
every celebration and it is in his prayers for God’s gifts and 
for us all that we join. And, as in the New Testament accounts 
of the institution, his prayer is itself a giving of thanks; so that 
the Lord’s Supper is both a verbum visibile of the divine grace 
and the supreme thanksgiving eucharistia of the people of 
God. We are throughout in the realm of spirit. It is through 
the Holy Spirit that the blessing and the gift are given. The 
Presence, which we do not try to define, is a spiritual presence. 
We begin from the historical fact of the incarnation in the 
power of the Holy Spirit, and we are already moving forward 
to the complete spiritual reality of the coming of the Lord and 
the life of the heavenly city. 

Ministry 


(a) The ministry was instituted by Jesus Christ , the Head 
of the church, “ for the perfecting of the saints , . . . the up¬ 
building of the body of Christ ” and is a gift of God to the 
church in the service of the word and sacraments. 

This ministry does not exclude but presupposes the <( royal 
priesthood ” to which all Christians are called as the redeemed 
of Jesus Christ. 

Ordination to the ministry, according to New Testament 
teaching and the historic practice of the church, is by prayer 
and the laying on of hands. 

It is essential to a united church that it should have a min¬ 
istry universally recognized. 

(b) In a united church the historic episcopate should be 
interpreted as including bishops, presbyters and deacons, with¬ 
out insistence upon any one dogmatic determination of doc¬ 
trine concerning the ministry. The intimate association of 
the presbyters in council with the bishop, and of the laity with 
both, in the government of the church — which had lapsed, 
especially in the Western church, in the Middle Ages but was 
revived through the Reformation in varying forms — should 
be conserved. 

In the united church of the future no episcopate would be 
recognized that was not both constitutional and representative 
of the whole church — constitutional in the exercise of author- 



138 World Chaos or World Christianity 

ity in its association with the presbyters in council, and repre¬ 
sentative in effective association with the ministry and the 
laity in the councils or synods of the church. 

The apostolic succession has been and is understood in vari¬ 
ous ways. It has been thought of as the succession of bishops 
in the principle sees of Christendom, handing down and pre¬ 
serving the apostles’ doctrine. In addition to this succession 
in office there has been a succession of bishops by laying on 
of hands. # 

From early times this double succession has been associated 
with the stewardship of the sacraments, and is regarded by 
certain churches as constituting the true and only guarantee 
of sacramental grace and right doctrine. Others cherish the 
same values manifested in a succession of ordinations by pres¬ 
byteries duly constituted and exercising episcopal functions, 
and in the succession of presbyters in charge of parishes, with 
special emphasis on the true preaching of the word and the 
right administration of the sacraments. Others consider the 
succession to mean the transmission from generation to genera¬ 
tion of the authority of ministerial oversight over both clergy 
and laity in the church, and they regard it as both a symbol 
and a bond of unity. Others interpret apostolic succession as 
meaning essentially, or even exclusively, the maintenance of 
the apostles’ witness through the true preaching of the gospel, 
the right administration of the sacraments and the perpetuation 
of the Christian life in the Christian community. In every case 
churches treasure the apostolic succession in which they be¬ 
lieve. 


(c) Comprehensive union must involve the fullest mutual 
recognition, each church humbly acknowledging that there 
are gifts belonging to others which would be of benefit to the 
whole church. 

If the ministry of the united church should sufficiently in¬ 
clude characteristic elements from the episcopal, presbyterial 
and congregational systems, the present adherents of those sys¬ 
tems would have mutually recognized one another’s places in 
the church of God, all would be able to find a spiritual home in 
the united church, and the doctrine of the apostolic succession 
would, upon a common basis of faith, attain the fullness which 



Edinburgh Speaks 


139 

belongs to it by comprehending at once the word, the ministry 
and the sacraments, and the life of the Christian community. 

We are alike called of God to pray and to labor by every 
means for the promotion of this common aim, recognizing that 
the future or ultimate form to be assumed by the united church 
must depend not only on the experience of the past, but above 
all upon the continued direction of the Holy Spirit. 


IV. THE CHURCH’S UNITY IN LIFE AND WORSHIP 

The unity of which we are in search is not simple but com¬ 
plex. It has two aspects: ( a ) the inner spiritual unity known 
in its completeness to God alone; and ( b ) the outward unity 
which expresses itself in mutual recognition, cooperative action 
and corporate or institutional unity. In view of our instruc¬ 
tions we have confined ourselves to bringing forward concrete 
proposals mentioned by different members of the section. 
These may be regarded as next steps, some of which are of 
concern to individual communions, others of concern to groups 
of communions in certain countries or other areas, and still 
others may be considered as of ecumenical or world-wide range. 

Need of Wider Knowledge 

In view of the admitted fact that a principal hindrance to 
Christian and church unity is the widely prevailing ignorance, 
apathy and inertia on the whole subject of unity, we earnestly 
advocate the launching and conducting in various communions 
of an adequate educational ecumenical program. To this end 
simple, and also more elaborate, outlines of study of interest¬ 
ing and relevant aspects of the Christian union movement 
should be prepared and introduced. 

Existing books on the principles of the world-wide Christian 
movement, now commonly called “ ecumenism,” though valu¬ 
able, are as a rule too technical for general use. So much de¬ 
pends on a widespread understanding of this subject that 
special material should be produced for the general church 
membership. For instance, a series of small volumes about 
the various communions, giving the facts which are most dis¬ 
tinctive, significant and of living interest, would meet a very 
real need in many countries. There is a place, moreover, for 



140 World Chaos or World Christianity 

carefully planned articles in the more influential magazines. 
Current ecumenical developments must also receive more sys¬ 
tematic attention in both the religious and the secular press. 
It is at this point — the failure to educate the rank and file of the 
lay membership, both men and women — that so many co¬ 
operative and union schemes break down or fail to advance. 

In this connection we warmly approve the proposal, already 
discussed in several quarters, that an authoritative, Christian, 
ecumenical review should be undertaken, preferably under 
the auspices of such ecumenical church organization as may 
follow the Oxford and Edinburgh conferences. 

Theological Education 

The theological colleges or seminaries of each communion 
should make provision in the curriculum for instruction of 
the future ministry in all that pertains to the drawing to¬ 
gether of the various Christian communions, with special ref¬ 
erence to the more significant developments and plans of 
present-day ecumenical movements. The chairs dealing with 
doctrine should include instruction in the doctrines, not only 
of the church to which each institution belongs, but also of 
other communions. Chairs of church history, liturgies and 
missions should deal with the history and work of all branches 
of Christendom. In certain centers this can be achieved by 
joint action on the part of several colleges. Moreover, in ad¬ 
dition to instruction through lectures and seminar work, inter¬ 
visitation on the part of students of the colleges of different 
communions should be encouraged. The valuable work of the 
Ecumenical Seminar in Geneva will be found suggestive, as 
also the activities of the Student Christian movements in the 
theological colleges and seminaries. 

Education of the Young 

The spreading of the spirit of Christian ecumenical fellow¬ 
ship needs not only the conscious communication of knowl¬ 
edge and ideas, but the fostering of such attitudes and spiritual 
experience as will lead to the desire for unity. While this is 
true of old and young alike, it is peculiarly desirable that in 
the processes of Christian education this principle should be 
borne in mind. 


Edinburgh Speaks 


141 


Research Groups 

The plan followed in Holland, France, Victoria (Australia), 
and also in other countries, of forming societies of theologians 
and other scholars for more profound study and research in the 
problems of ecumenism might well be followed in other coun¬ 
tries, possibly through the agency of existing institutions. 

A Day of Prayer 

The practice in some countries — for example, Norway — 
of setting apart one Sunday each year for special prayer for 
the ecumenical movement is worthy of wide observance. More¬ 
over, we draw attention to the suggestion of Pastor Wilfred 
Monod, endorsed by many others, that when the holy com¬ 
munion is celebrated the officiating minister should use words 
in prayer or in preaching which will help worshipers to identify 
themselves with the whole Christian fellowship in the act of 
communion. 


Mutual Church Aid 

The practice of the early Christian church, which is being 
followed so helpfully today by the European Central Office 
for Inter-Church Aid,* the Russian Church Aid Fund, and by 
certain individual communions, of affording mutual help to 
suffering or weaker churches of other communions, is not only 
an expression of the spirit of Christ but also an invaluable 
means of fostering ecumenical education and fellowship. 

Spiritual Preparation 

A precursor to many very significant church union move¬ 
ments has been prolonged and pronouncedly spiritual prepara¬ 
tion, including united movements for prayer and joint par¬ 
ticipation in such Christian tasks as evangelism and meeting 
great moral and social needs. Of this there are conspicuous 

* The Central Office for Inter-Church Aid is a relief organization on 
an interdenominational basis, organized by the Bethesda Conference at 
Copenhagen, 1922, composed of seventy officially appointed church repre¬ 
sentatives from Europe and America. This office gave help to suffering 
evangelical churches of various denominations in sixteen countries as well 
as to Orthodox, Old Catholic, Armenian and Nestorian Assyrian churches. 


142 World Chaos or World Christianity 

examples in India, China, Japan and Korea, as well as in the 
West. The recent united Preaching Mission in a score or more 
of the leading cities of America, and other united evangelistic 
campaigns, not only afford convincing demonstrations of unity 
but also have been the means of generating the spirit of unity 
and creating a temper which finds the continuance of division 
intolerable. 

Principles of Cooperation 

It is widely recognized that sound policies of cooperation 
in all spheres of Christian action have done much to facilitate 
the drawing together of the Christian churches. Such coopera¬ 
tion between Christian bodies, if it is to be truly effective, must 
have regard to certain guiding principles and governing con¬ 
siderations drawn from experience already accumulated in 
many countries. 

Among these attention is called to the following: 

(1) In determining the sphere of cooperation due regard is 
paid to the objects to be achieved, namely: 

(a) to meet real and recognized need; 

(b) to obviate conflict and unnecessary waste; 

(c) to accomplish important results which cannot 
be secured as well, if at all, by the cooperative 
agencies working separately. 

(2) At the very beginning of the undertaking the various 
bodies joining in the cooperative arrangement enter 
into an understanding as to objectives, scope, direction, 
assignment of responsibilities, support and all else vital 
to the success of the undertaking, and this understand¬ 
ing is set forth with clarity in writing. 

(3) The cooperative agency possesses only such power as 
the cooperating bodies confer upon it. 

(4) The plan of organization is made as simple as is com¬ 
patible with achieving the desired results. 

(5) Everything is done openly and in consultation. 

(6) There is a sincere determination to understand the 
viewpoints and the distinctive characteristics of the 
different units, and willingness to accept what others 
have to give. 


Edinburgh Speaks 


143 

(7) Wherever cooperation is undertaken it is carried 
through so thoroughly as to create the confidence on 
which further developments must depend. 

(8) No large venture of cooperation can proceed to high 
success without adequate financial resources, but it is 
believed that those will be forthcoming if the other 
conditions here emphasized are met. 

(9) The leaders are on their guard lest in their own lives 
there be manifested or tolerated those things which 
tend to destroy cooperation or to make impossible true 
Christian unity; for example, ignorance and prejudice, 
hazy thinking and vague statements, selfish ambition 
and jealousy, suspicion and lack of frankness, intrigue 
and disloyalty. 

(10) The prime consideration to be borne constantly in 
mind by all engaged in the work of cooperation is that 
of rendering Christlike service. First and last in point 
of importance is the recognition of the Lordship of 
Jesus Christ, and the conviction that he himself wills 
cooperation and unity. 

Fellowships of Unity 

Springing up in different parts of the world are fellowships 
of unity which are exerting an influence out of all proportion 
to their number. The Association of Unity inaugurated by the 
late Peter Ainslie is an illustration. Other examples are the 
Friends of Reunion in Great Britain, the Anglican and Eastern 
Church Association, and the Fellowship of St. Alban and St. 
Sergius. Still another is the Fellowship of Unity in Egypt. 
This fellowship holds each year great united meetings of mem¬ 
bers of several communions, Eastern and Western, provides 
lectures on various aspects of the religious life and practices of 
the churches, furnishes articles for the press dealing with ecu¬ 
menical questions, and arranges for parties to visit different 
churches at special times and seasons for the study of different 
forms of worship. The churches have hardly begun to explore 
the possibilities of realizing a more vital understanding and a 
deeper unity through acquaintance with one another’s modes 
and experiences of worship. 


144 World Chaos or World Christianity 
Regional Conferences 

We believe the time has come when in our various countries 
there should be held regional conferences similar to those held 
at Oxford and Edinburgh. In certain of the larger countries 
there might well be held in different areas a series of more inti¬ 
mate consultations, or retreats, of church leaders, or other 
specialized groups. 

Youth Movements 

A most reassuring feature of the ecumenical movement is the 
growing keen interest in the subject being manifested by the 
Student Christian movements and other Christian youth or¬ 
ganizations. This interest should be fostered in every possible 
way. We commend heartily the World Christian Youth Con¬ 
ference planned for the year 1939 [at Amsterdam]. 

Increase of Intercourse 

We draw attention to the multiplying examples of exchange 
of membership, of interchange of pulpits, and of intercom¬ 
munion on the part of the different churches in all parts of the 
world, and, subject to proper understanding and regulation, 
believe that these practices should be encouraged. 

Where occasional communion is admitted in the practice 
of a church but is not formally recognized by its law, it is de¬ 
sirable that, where principles permit, this apparent incongruity 
should be removed as soon as possible in order to avoid mis¬ 
understanding, both on the part of the recipient and of mem¬ 
bers of the communion extending the invitation. Where hesi¬ 
tancy still remains because of this ambiguity, or for any reason, 
the communicants of one church, whether ministers or laymen, 
should be encouraged to be present at the sacraments of other 
churches. And such presence should be regarded as an act of 
common worship expressing the measure of spiritual unity al¬ 
ready attained. 

We feel moved to say in this connection that to press for in¬ 
tercommunion with those whose consciences forbid it, or to 
show impatience with those whose loyalties hold them back 
from that which many of us greatly desire, is an offense against 
Christian charity and a disservice to the cause of unity. On 


Edinburgh Speaks 


145 

the other hand, the refusal of intercommunion is tolerable only 
when it is accompanied by evident expressions of heartfelt sor¬ 
row on the part of those who find themselves bound to with¬ 
hold it. 

Plans for Church Union 

It is recommended that communions represented at the pres¬ 
ent conference consider the desirability of setting up effective 
standing commissions for the study of the ecumenical questions, 
for fostering mutually helpful relations with other communions 
and for conducting conversations with other communions lead¬ 
ing toward church union. 

It is highly desirable, in countries where conditions are fa¬ 
vorable and the time seems ripe, that those communions which 
already enjoy a considerable measure of mutual understanding, 
fellowship and cooperation should proceed without undue de¬ 
lay to the stage of official negotiations, or at least of conversa¬ 
tions, and in particular should produce, as soon as may be, a 
preliminary or provisional draft scheme of union for submis¬ 
sion to their constituencies. 

Needs of Special Areas 

In certain regions circumstances make a special demand on 
the churches for cooperative action. One type of problem is 
presented by areas where there has been a sudden marked in¬ 
crease in population, or where there have been created entirely 
new communities through the operation of rehousing schemes. 
This situation calls for united action on the part of different 
churches, and the absence of such action is likely to lead to 
bitterness, strife and wasted effort. To deal with such situa¬ 
tions it is suggested that the churches, where their principles 
permit, should set up permanent comity or international com¬ 
missions to review, recommend and guide the location of new 
churches. Such a plan will avoid the danger of congregations 
being created which have a local unity, but are cut off from the 
contacts and resources afforded by membership in a wider com¬ 
munion. Similar action may be possible in the numerous cen¬ 
ters where, owing to a decrease of population, more churches 
exist than the populations need or can support. There are 
other problems presented in other areas which are susceptible 
of similar treatment. 


146 World Chaos or World Christianity 

Territorial and Ecumenical Unity 

A problem calling for farsighted policy is that presented in 
areas where, when union is under discussion, it becomes neces¬ 
sary for a church to choose between entering into a unity with 
other denominations within the same national boundary, on 
the one hand, and, on the other hand, maintaining connections 
with other churches of its own order throughout the world. 
Experience shows that the injury done to the Christian cause 
by the multiplicity of separate churches within a given area is 
so great that the territorial unity of churches should normally 
be regarded as desirable where it can be accomplished without 
violating the principles of the churches concerned. It must, 
however, be recognized that the ideal of a territorially or na¬ 
tionally united church is accompanied by certain dangers. 
Therefore we urge that in developing church union on the 
territorial basis every care be taken to preserve in nationally 
constituted churches a sense of ecumenical relationship, and to 
maintain such relationship in every possible way. For exam¬ 
ple, the United Church of Canada not only has united three 
communions into one united church, but also maintains affilia¬ 
tions with the ecumenical bodies to which the three uniting 
communions belonged. 

The Older and Younger Churches 

The churches and mission boards of the West have a great 
responsibility to discharge in regard to union movements 
among the younger churches. Even where the younger 
churches are autonomous, they will naturally seek counsel and 
encouragement from the older churches to which under God 
they owe their origin. While it is right and proper for the 
older churches to place at the disposal of younger churches 
what they most value in doctrine, worship and order, it must 
be recognized as a fundamental necessity that in all matters the 
younger churches, as well as the older churches, should be free 
to follow the leading of the Spirit of God as it is apprehended 
by them. 

The conference has heard, with deep appreciation, of move¬ 
ments toward church union in many parts of the world. It 
regards the scheme for church union in South India, about 


Edinburgh Speaks 


147 

which three churches are now negotiating, as deserving of par¬ 
ticular attention and study, because in it an attempt is being 
made to include within a united church communions holding 
to the episcopal, the presbyterial and the congregational prin¬ 
ciples. The importance of prayerful study of this scheme is 
further shown by the fact that union negotiations based on its 
principles are in progress in other parts of the world. In deal¬ 
ing with this and with similar cases the churches of East and 
West alike may be called upon for great acts of trust. 

The World Council of Churches 

If the churches adopt the proposal to form a World Council 
of Churches which has been approved in principle by this con¬ 
ference as well as by the conference held at Oxford, we think it 
should be so designed as to conserve the distinctive character 
and values of each of the movements represented in the two 
conferences. To this end it is essential that, while freedom 
should be exercised in the formation of special committees, the 
churches as such should come together on the basis of the doc¬ 
trine of the incarnation. The largest success of the plan de¬ 
pends upon efficient representative national bodies, as these will 
insure adequate representation of every communion.* 

Because of the tragedy of the contemporary situation it 
was felt that some word should go forth from Edinburgh 
regarding the victims of the wars in progress in both East 
and West. The following declaration of sympathy was 
approved by the conference: 

We have met at a time of great strain and distress alike in 
Europe and in the Far East. We watch with sympathy and 
sorrow the menace and horrors of war. We are persuaded that 
war never occurs except as a result and expression of that sin to 
redeem which Christ came into the world. 

We therefore call all men, and ourselves before all others, to 
penitence and to prayer, that God may give to us and all men 
love of justice, the readiness to forgive, a knowledge of his will, 

* So important is the whole question of this world Council of Churches 
that we shall consider it in detail in the final chapter. (Author’s note.) 


148 World Chaos or World Christianity 

and the courage to obey it. For all who bear rule in their na¬ 
tions we ask the attendant bestowal of these gifts, and we pray 
that despite all earthly causes of estrangement Christians in all 
lands may be united in the fellowship of prayer and obedience. 

In submitting this declaration Dr. Temple said that one 
ground for it was the fact that among the members of our 
conference were some whose dear ones in these lands were 
exposed to the horrors of war. 

After the long process of receiving, amending, expand¬ 
ing, and accepting for transmission to the churches the re¬ 
ports of the sections, the conference moved to its close with 
a steadiness and conviction which all felt as a stimulus to 
deep spiritual commitment. There was no dwindling of 
attendance; almost without exception the delegates re¬ 
mained to the end. The closing session in the Assembly 
Hall, where the Affirmation of Unity was presented, seemed 
to surge into a solemn movement of unity — inspiring, 
tremendous, indescribable, an experience entirely and con¬ 
vincingly real. 

In presenting the Affirmation of Unity, the Reverend 
Dr. Robert A. Ashworth, of the Northern Baptist Conven¬ 
tion of the United States, a native of Glasgow, who was 
chairman of the committee which drafted the statement, 
said: 

Those who were present at Lausanne will remember that 
there was adopted there what was called a “ call to unity.” 
That was a portion of the address by Bishop Brent at the begin¬ 
ning of the conference, and at the request of the conference it 
was somewhat enlarged, and was sent forth as the expression of 
the conference itself. 

In the preparation of the program for this conference the 
program committee provided for the preparation of an “ affir¬ 
mation of unity,” and it must have been somewhat of a venture 
of faith on the part of the committee to provide for such a 


Edinburgh Speaks 


149 

statement before the conference assembled. It is, of course, 
quite an advance over a mere call to unity such as was sent forth 
by the conference at Lausanne, and yet I think we all feel that 
the results of our deliberations together here have revealed a 
growth in unity of spirit, and have disclosed a real existing 
unity below all our divisions. 

So this statement that has been prepared for your considera¬ 
tion tries to set forth that sense of unity that does underlie our 
differences as they have been discussed at this conference. 

It is proposed that this statement be given a very wide cir¬ 
culation through the public press. It is addressed to the 
churches that sent us here, and to the world at large. 

The committee that has prepared this statement, I think, is 
a truly representative committee — a kind of cross section of 
the conference, composed of nine delegates, representing nine 
different communions, coming from eight different countries, 
and speaking seven different native languages. 

When we first got together one might reasonably have 
doubted whether such a committee as that could have got out 
any sort of common statement on any subject. If the question 
had been one of politics, I know we might have disagreed quite 
violently. If it had been a question of economics, we should 
not have been able to make a common statement. If the ques¬ 
tion had been one of theology, there might have been some 
slight differences of opinion on that subject. I am happy to 
say, however, that there was no outstanding difference — none 
whatsoever. This report comes to you as the unanimous rec¬ 
ommendation of your committee. 

Dr. Ashworth concluded by explaining that a number of 
suggestions had been made, and these had been considered 
at a session that morning. Every one of them had been 
taken into account in redrafting the statement. 

What many regarded as the most impressive moment of 
the conference was reached when, after a full discussion in 
which several amendments were made, the Affirmation of 
Unity was passed. The Archbishop of York declared that 
acceptance of the statement should be “ a very solemn and 
deliberate act,” and then read the concluding sentence: 


150 World Chaos or World Christianity 

“ We pray that everywhere in a world divided and per¬ 
plexed men may turn to Jesus Christ our Lord, who makes 
us one in spite of our divisions, that he may bind in one 
those who by many worldly claims are set at variance; and 
that the world may at last find peace and unity in him, to 
whom be glory forever.” 

The delegates stood in silence for a few moments to sig¬ 
nify their wholehearted approval, and prolonged applause 
greeted the archbishop’s announcement that the affirma¬ 
tion had been passed with the support of every member of 
the conference. Particular interest attaches to the fact 
that the Roman Catholic observer of the proceedings stood 
with the rest, in token, obviously, of his feeling that this 
affirmation was so Christian as to be at least catholic — 
with a small “ c ”! 

The only other business at the morning session was the 
final adoption of the full report of the conference. A re¬ 
drafted part of the report of Section V was submitted, and 
in the course of discussion of it the Right Reverend Dr. 
A. C. Headlam, bishop of Gloucester, said that the main 
fundamental difficulty which the conference had had to 
face was how to reconcile those who claim to have an au¬ 
thoritative ministry based on a historical apostolic succes¬ 
sion to giving due consideration to the orders and sacra¬ 
ments of those who do not claim to stand in that succession. 
To many of them it was clear that a united church must 
have that historical ministry, but a great bar to its accept¬ 
ance was the fact that it had been used to deny the spiritual 
values and validity of nonepiscopal ministries. 

The Church of England, continued Dr. Headlam, had 
never made any judgment condemning the orders and 
sacraments of any other church — although it was true 
that individuals and groups had delivered such judgments. 
The Presbyterian Church always made certain that those 


Edinburgh Speaks 


151 

who ministered in it had proper presbyterial ordination, 
but it had not condemned the orders or sacraments of other 
bodies. 

“ Can we believe,” he asked, “ that Jesus Christ himself 
would refuse to be present at a good Presbyterian, Metho¬ 
dist or Congregational sacrament, because there were no 
episcopal orders, when those persons sincerely desired to 
fulfill his commands? I cannot believe that, nor can I be¬ 
lieve that he has one grace to give to Episcopalians and 
another for non-Episcopalians.” 

There was a moment of more than a little significance 
when the venerable president of the Southern Baptist Con¬ 
vention, Dr. J. R. Sampey, asked for the floor. He began 
by saying that he had been disturbed at times during the 
discussions when it seemed to him that some formal con¬ 
ception of the church and of the sacraments was thrust be¬ 
tween the individual soul and the Saviour. He felt sure 
that not only Baptists but all who understood the genius 
of Christianity would agree that essentially salvation did 
not come to man through the priesthood or the sacraments 
but only through the redeeming love of God mediated to 
man through his Son. He concluded with the statement 
that while in the past the members of his branch of the 
church had not taken part in the ecumenical movement, he 
firmly hoped and believed that in the future they would 
do so. 

The final word on the reports and other messages of the 
conference was spoken by the Reverend Canon C. L. 
Broun, vice-provost and chancellor of St. Mary’s Cathe¬ 
dral, Edinburgh. He paid a tribute to the work of those 
who had labored over the drafting, saying — as others had 
said — that it was inspiring to witness the process by which 
practical unanimity had been reached on so many difficult 
points. He felt that the final statements expressed every- 


152 World Chaos or World Christianity 

thing that was essential in all the varied standpoints rep¬ 
resented. 

With that the entire report as redrafted and amended by 
the whole body of delegates was accepted for transmission 
to the churches amid wholehearted applause. Then the 
company of delegates and after them the visitors rose to 
go in procession through the streets to the High Kirk of 
St. Giles’ for the concluding service of worship. 

Because of its beauty and fitness as the closing of a great 
Christian council which is sure to go down in history as one 
of the significant milestones in the life of world Christian¬ 
ity, it seems meet to include here the whole of the service 
just as it took place under the leadership of the chairman. 

order of service 

The Call to Worship and the Reading of the Affirmation 
of Unity 

We are one in faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the incarnate 
Word of God. We are one in allegiance to him as Head of the 
church, and as King of kings and Lord of lords. We are one in 
acknowledging that this allegiance takes precedence of any 
other allegiance that may make claims upon us. 

This unity does not consist in the agreement of our minds 
or the consent of our wills. It is founded in Jesus Christ him¬ 
self, who lived, died, and rose again to bring us to the Father, 
and who through the Holy Spirit dwells in his church. We are 
one because we are all the objects of the love and grace of God, 
and called by him to witness in all the world to his glorious 
gospel. 

Our unity is of heart and spirit. We are divided in the out¬ 
ward forms of our life in Christ because we understand differ¬ 
ently his will for his church. We believe, however, that a 
deeper understanding will lead us toward a united apprehen¬ 
sion of the truth as it is in Jesus. We humbly acknowledge that 
our divisions are contrary to the will of Christ, and we pray 
God in his mercy to shorten the days of our separation and to 
guide us by his spirit into the fullness of unity. 


Edinburgh Speaks 


153 

We are thankful that during recent years we have been 
drawn together; prejudices have been overcome, misunder¬ 
standings removed, and real, if limited, progress has been made 
toward our goal of a common mind. 

In this conference we may gratefully claim that the Spirit of 
God has made us willing to learn from one another, and has 
given us a fuller vision of the truth and enriched our spiritual 
experience. We have lifted up our hearts together in prayer; 
we have sung the same hymns; together we have read the same 
Holy Scriptures. We recognize in one another, across the bar¬ 
riers of our separation, a common Christian outlook and a com¬ 
mon standard of values. We are therefore assured of a unity 
deeper than our divisions. 

We are convinced that our unity of spirit and aim must be 
embodied in a way that will make it manifest to the world, 
though we do not yet clearly see what outward form it should 
take. We believe that every sincere attempt to cooperate in 
the concerns of the kingdom of God draws the severed com¬ 
munions together in increased mutual understanding and good 
will. 

We call upon our fellow Christians of all communions to 
practice such cooperation; to consider patiently occasions of 
disunion that they may be overcome; to be ready to learn from 
those who differ from them; to seek to remove those obstacles 
to the furtherance of the gospel in the non-Christian world 
which arise from our divisions; and constantly to pray for that 
unity which we believe to be our Lord’s will for his church. 

We desire also to declare to all men everywhere our assur¬ 
ance that Christ is the one hope of unity for the world in face 
of the distractions and dissensions of this present time. We 
know that our witness is weakened by our divisions. Yet we are 
one in Christ and in the fellowship of his Spirit. 

We pray that everywhere, in a world divided and perplexed, 
men may turn to Jesus Christ our Lord, who makes us one in 
spite of our divisions; that he may bind in one those who by 
many worldly claims are set at variance; and that the world may 
at last find peace and unity in him; to whom be glory forever. 


154 World Chaos or World Christianity 

An Act of Thanksgiving 

Hymn — Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty 

We give thanks to Almighty God, Father, Son, and Holy 
Spirit, that we are one in our Lord Jesus Christ; not by the 
agreement of our minds or the consent of our wills, but by that 
which he, in his unmerited grace, has done for us in his in¬ 
carnation, death and resurrection, and by the gift of the Holy 
Spirit. 

We thank Thee, O God. 

We give thanks that he has called us into his faith, and laid 
upon us an allegiance to himself that is above all other loyalties. 

We thank Thee, O God. 

We give thanks for the knowledge that though we are divided 
in outward form we all are the objects of the love and grace 
of God. 

We thank Thee, O God. 

We give thanks that we have been brought into a fellowship 
of thought and prayer; for all that we have learned in our fel¬ 
lowship; for prejudices overcome, misunderstandings removed, 
sympathies enlarged, insight deepened; and for all advance that 
has been made toward a common mind. 

We pray that through patience and humility Christians of 
each several communion may be led to a deeper understanding 
of those truths of the gospel to which they have borne witness; 
into a wider understanding of those truths for which other com¬ 
munions have stood; and finally into an apprehension of the 
truth in its fullness, wherein all our partial apprehension shall 
be brought into unity. 

Lord, hear our prayer. 

We thank Thee, O God. 

We give thanks for the joy that we have found in sharing the 
treasures of worship and devotion that we even now hold in 
common. 

We thank Thee, O God. 

We acknowledge that our understanding of the truth as it is 
in Jesus has been limited by our pride, willfulness and narrow¬ 
ness of mind, and that our witness to the world is weakened 
by our divisions. 

Lord, have mercy upon us. 


Edinburgh Speaks 


J 55 

We therefore pray together to Almighty God, Father, Son, 
and Holy Spirit, that he will forgive the sinfulness of our sepa¬ 
ration, and grant us true repentance and grace to amend our 
ways. 

Lord, hear our prayer. 

We pray that Christians everywhere may be led to seek dili¬ 
gently for ways of manifesting in outward and visible form the 
unity of heart and spirit which has been granted to us. 

Lord, hear our prayer. 

We pray that all men everywhere, in a world distracted and 
divided, may turn to Christ, who makes us one in spite of our 
divisions; that he may bind in one those whom many worldly 
claims set at variance; and that the world may at last find peace 
and unity in him; to whom be glory forever. 

Lord, hear our prayer. 

Hymn — Now thank we all our God 

Reading — John 15:1-12. 

Then shall silence he kept for a space. 

Closing Prayers — “ O Christ, our only Saviour ” 

“ O Lord, support us ” 

The Blessing. 

As the last strains of music died away within the cathe¬ 
dral a silent and deeply moved company of men and women 
filed through the doors into the sunlit square surrounding 
the ancient church. I see them there now, gathered in 
friendly groups around a spot on the pavement marked by 
the outline of a heart — the “ heart of Midlothian.” Was 
it symbolic? One is at liberty to think so; for on that spot 
once stood an infamous prison in which the victims of 
the Scottish religious wars were incarcerated and on whose 
grim walls the head of more than one martyr was exposed 
to the public gaze. We live in a different era; and yet how 
solemn are the warnings that even in our own day perse¬ 
cution and death for faith are not things of the past only. 
May not that symbol have meant that the heart of Christ 


156 World Chaos or World Christianity 

is the uniting and unifying factor upon which alone we 
may rely for the strengthening of his church “ against 
principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the 
darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high 
places ”? 


VI 

OXFORD AND EDINBURGH ACT 

A s I was about to begin writing this chapter a friend 
l of mine, a physician, asked me whether I thought that 
what had been said and done at Oxford and Edinburgh 
would have any significant effect in the life of the world. 
It happened that, as I knew, he had just returned from a 
great meeting of medical men in Europe. Now the work 
of such a group differs greatly from that of a religious as¬ 
sembly; and yet, as I suggested to my friend, the answer 
to his question would involve many considerations in some 
measure parallel. To be effective in practical life the fruits 
of any discussion, no matter how expert or highly informed 
the participants, must first be given the stamp of general 
professional approval; then they must be incorporated in 
the education of aspirants to the profession and communi¬ 
cated to all its leading representatives; and thus sooner or 
later they will become integral to that branch of human 
activity in all the civilized world. Suppose, for example, 
that a positive cure for cancer were discovered. Would 
anyone in his senses expect the mortality from cancer to 
drop within a few weeks? The thoughtful man would 
realize that the new technique would have to pass by rela¬ 
tively slow stages into common practice. Great numbers 
of individuals would have to be convinced of its value and 
trained in its use. There would be the barriers of lan¬ 
guage, distance, finance, medical organization and admin¬ 
istration to overcome. Moreover, without some generally 
recognized world organization to communicate with the 

i57 


158 World Chaos or World Christianity 

national medical associations and stimulate promotion of 
and education in the new technique there could be no rapid 
advance in the use of even so priceless a boon as a cure for 
cancer. 

You see the application of this illustration, I am sure, 
without my laboring the point. Is it not a fair analogy? 
Curiously enough, when it comes to a matter like science 
or medicine everyone is prepared to admit the advantage — 
indeed the indispensableness — of effective world organi¬ 
zation. Some sort of international link simply must exist, 
and no one supposes that the right kind will be forged by 
chance. Somewhere there must be a coordinating center 
which makes it a primary task to look to the establishment 
and effective use of channels of communication, if nothing 
more. But as concerns the religious sphere, it has often 
been assumed that all that is needed there is a vague, gen¬ 
eral good will — a kind of psychic realization of fellowship, 
a sentimental gesture now and then in the direction of the 
ideal unity. How unintelligent — and how futile! 

Just because of the great desire for a unity more than 
sentimental which pervaded both Oxford and Edinburgh 
tremendous interest was shown in the measures proposed in 
the field of organization. And it is to that part of the story 
of the two conferences that we now turn. 

You will recall references in the account of Oxford’s 
deliberations to the debate over the proposed World Coun¬ 
cil of Churches. Because the same debate took place at 
Edinburgh and essentially the same action was taken, I 
indicated that the fuller account of what happened would 
be given here. 

Just what was the proposal? The simplest answer to that 
question is to summarize the report made by the “ Com¬ 
mittee of Thirty-five,” headed by Dr. William Temple, 
archbishop of York. First, however, let us glance at the 


Oxford and Edinburgh Act 159 

list of the members of that committee to see its remarkably 
representative character. Here it is: 

Jonkvrouwe C. M. van Asch van Wijck, President, World's 
Young Women’s Christian Association 
The Rev. M. E. Aubrey, Moderator, Federal Council of Evan¬ 
gelical Free Churches, England and Wales 
Bishop James C. Baker, Methodist Episcopal Church, San 
Francisco 

Dr. Albert W. Beaven, President, Colgate-Rochester Seminary, 
New York 

Pasteur Marc Boegner, President, French Federation of Prot¬ 
estant Churches 

Dr. D. Y. Brilioth, Dean of Lund, Sweden 
Professor William Adams Brown, Union Theological Semi¬ 
nary, New York 

Professor Walter T. Brown, Victoria University, Toronto, 
Canada 

Dr. Samuel McCrea Cavert, Federal Council of Churches, 
U. S. A. 

The Bishop of Chichester 

The Rev. Dr. Hutchison Cockbum, Dunblane Cathedral, 
Scotland 

The Most Rev. Archbishop Germanos, Metropolitan of Thya- 
teira 

Dr. Fred F. Goodsell, American Board of Commissioners for 
Foreign Missions, Boston, U. S. A. 

Pasteur Henry-Louis Henriod, General Secretary, Universal 
Christian Council for Life and Work 
Canon L. Hodgson, Winchester, General Secretary, Faith and 
Order Movement 

Miss Eleanora Iredale, Life and Work 

Dr. Alphons Koechlin, Vice-President, World Alliance of 
Young Men’s Christian Associations 
Dr. Hanns Lilje, Germany 

The Rev. W. F. Lofthouse, Principal, Handsworth College, 
Birmingham 

Sir Walter Moberly, Chairman, University Grants Committee, 
London 

Dr. John R. Mott, Chairman, International Missionary Coun¬ 
cil 


160 World Chaos or World Christianity 

The Rev. Dr. Lewis S. Mudge, Presbyterian Church of the 
U. S. A. 

Bishop G. Ashton Oldham, Bishop of Albany, U. S. A. 

Dr. J. H. Oldham, International Missionary Council, Chair¬ 
man, Research Commission of the Oxford Conference 
Bishop Edward L. Parsons, Bishop of California 
The Rev. William Paton, Secretary, International Missionary 
Council 

Dr. Hans Schonfeld, Director, Research Department of the 
Universal Christian Council 

The Rev. Canon Tissington Tatlow, D.D., Rector of St. Ed¬ 
mund the King, Lombard Street, London E. C. 

Dr. Reinold von Thadden, Germany 

Dr. W. A. Visser ’t Hooft, General Secretary, World’s Student 
Christian Federation 
The Most Rev. the Archbishop of York 
Professor Stefan Zankov, Sofia 
Professor Dr. F. Zilka, Czechoslovakia 
General-Superintendent Dr. Zoellner, Germany 

Except for the three German members — of whom one 
had died and another was under arrest — and Professor F. 
Zilka, who was ill, all of these were present when the com¬ 
mittee met for a three-day session on July 8, 9 and 10, 1937, 
at Westfield College, Hampstead, London. The Reverend 
Dr. William P. Merrill of New York, chairman of the 
Church Peace Union, was by invitation also present part 
of the time. 

Such a group could bring to the consideration of prac¬ 
tical ways of fostering Christian unity and union wide 
experience and many points of view nationally, ecclesiasti¬ 
cally and philosophically. In presenting their recommen¬ 
dations both at Oxford and at Edinburgh, Dr. Temple 
pointed out that when, after a year of correspondence and 
preliminary discussion, the committee met at Westfield 
College, the members did not believe that they could come 
to any general agreement. When therefore they presently 


Oxford and Edinburgh Act 161 

found themselves in unanimous support of the plan for a 
world council to embrace what is now the work of two 
parallel but separate movements, there remained no room 
for doubt that the Spirit of God was guiding their delibera¬ 
tions. To believe anything else would seem almost to 
make a mockery of the Christian faith that He does so guide 
those whose minds and hearts are open to his leading. 

Now for the plan itself: It contemplates a World Coun¬ 
cil of Churches functioning through a general assembly 
of approximately two hundred representatives appointed 
directly by the cooperating churches and meeting every five 
years. There would also be a central committee, of ap¬ 
proximately sixty members, likewise representative of the 
churches, meeting annually as the executive of the general 
assembly. The council would have “ no power to legislate 
for the churches or to commit them to action without their 
consent.” Its functions, as provisionally defined, would 
include the following: 

“To carry on the work of the Faith and Order and the 
Life and Work movements; to make it easier for the 
churches to act together; to promote cooperation in study; 
to further the growth of ecumenical consciousness in the 
churches; to call world conferences on specific subjects as 
occasion requires.” 

There would be two special commissions, one for the 
further study of Faith and Order subjects, the other for 
the study of Life and Work subjects. 

Let us go back to Oxford for a few minutes and see how 
the idea impressed the delegates there and why they sup¬ 
ported it so heartily. Several of the speakers to whom the 
conference listened in its opening week suggested the need 
of action for the creation of a more comprehensive world 
organization. What seemed to many one of the most 


162 World Chaos or World Christianity 

searching and practical suggestions made came from Dr. 
Cavert of New York. After showing what immense im¬ 
portance attaches to effective unity in the life of contem¬ 
porary Christianity, he declared: “ If Christians are really 
animated by one spirit, there must be some body through 
which the spirit can be manifested and made effective in 
the world. The universal community of believers must be 
enabled to think and act as a community, not merely as 
national segments. The church today lacks the ecumenical 
organization which would fit it to exercise its true inter¬ 
national power.” 

The archbishop, whose support of the proposal has al¬ 
ready been mentioned, displayed genuine statesmanship 
and evidenced intense conviction as he argued for the sort 
of action which the Committee of Thirty-five had envis¬ 
aged and which he believed “ would bestow upon the 
church an organ it sorely needs.” 

After this preliminary presentation the proposal was 
thoroughly discussed in gatherings of groups representing 
each a different area. More than two hundred American 
church leaders, for example, met at St. Columbo’s Church 
to discuss this proposal and kindred matters from the 
American point of view. The Continental delegates met 
by themselves for the same purpose, as did the leaders of 
the Eastern churches. Numerous differences of course 
emerged; various modifications in plan and procedure 
were suggested and some doubts were raised; but on the 
whole there was in the larger body the same surprising 
unanimity that had appeared in the smaller. The Con¬ 
tinental delegates, “ being persuaded that everything which 
manifests before the world the unity of the body of Christ 
is in accordance with the will of God,” greeted “ with deep 
joy the prospect of a union of the two ecumenical move¬ 
ments.” The American delegates spoke to the same effect: 


Oxford and Edinburgh Act 163 

“We approve the report in principle with the understand¬ 
ing that the necessary details will be worked out by the 
various parties to the plan and submitted to the churches 
for their approval.” The Orthodox delegates had some 
misgivings, but they too supported in general the proposed 
council, recognizing that it would bring into being an 
agency which the late ecumenical patriarch, supreme head 
of the Eastern church, had himself strongly desired and 
specifically recommended. 

Toward the end of the second week a further session, 
the outcome of which has already been described in chapter 
two, brought the debate at Oxford to a conclusion. The 
addresses on the subject represented every major division 
of the church throughout the world, save of course the 
Roman Catholic, whose representatives at both Oxford 
and Edinburgh were by their own choice only observers 
and not participants. Particularly striking as evidence of 
the dawning of a new day in world Christianity was the 
suggestion, made by the Bishop of Christchurch, New Zea¬ 
land, a Briton, that the natural affiliation of Australia and 
New Zealand is with the lands of the Pacific. He felt that 
in a regional organization constituent to the world council 
it would be well to link the Anglo-Saxon churches of his 
part of the world not with the West but with the younger 
churches of the East. Commenting on this suggestion, the 
Indian Bishop of Dornakal, Dr. Azariah, expressed anxiety 
lest insufficient attention be paid the representation of the 
Oriental churches, which because they are so far removed 
in space are often left out of account by the stronger and 
older churches of the West. 

One point stressed by the Archbishop of York and others 
was the freedom afforded by the plan. No church would 
be associated with the new council save on its own initia¬ 
tive. National bodies likewise would be assured complete 


164 World Chaos or World Christianity 

autonomy by federal organization and representation. The 
archbishop also affirmed explicitly that the council should 
not be thought of as anti-Roman. The great Roman 
Church, he said, would have been warmly welcomed had 
its leaders seen fit to associate it with the non-Roman 
churches in this time of great emergency for the Christian 
faith as a whole. They would be warmly welcomed if at 
any time in the future they saw their way to cooperating in 
advancing the work of Christ in the world. “ But,” he 
concluded, “ in the meantime we cannot concede that theif 
inability to cooperate with us should hinder us from an 
attempt to cooperate more effectively with one another.” 

All this deliberation and discussion resulted, as will be 
remembered, in affirmative action, with only two dissent¬ 
ing votes. In accordance with the proposal, the business 
committee of the Oxford Conference at its final session ap¬ 
pointed seven men who, together with a similar group to 
be appointed at Edinburgh, were to communicate the plan 
to the churches and to put it provisionally into effect pend¬ 
ing acceptance and ratification by the churches. Those 
chosen at Oxford were: 

From Great Britain 
The Bishop of Chichester 
Dr. J. H. Oldham 
From the Orthodox Church 
Archbishop Germanos 
From the continent of Europe 
Pasteur Marc Boegner, France 
Bishop Marahrens, Germany 
From America 

Professor William Adams Brown 
Dr. John R. Mott 

Alternates for these seven were named, as follows: 

Sir Walter Moberly 
Dr. M. E. Aubrey 


Oxford and Edinburgh Act 


165 


The Bishop of Novi-Sad 
Dr. Alphons Koechlin 
Archbishop Eidem 
Dr. Samuel McCrea Cavert 
Honorable Charles P. Taft 

Since it would be confusing to separate this list from 
that of the men chosen at Edinburgh I shall disregard 
chronology and say now that the corresponding appointees 
at Edinburgh were: 

From Great Britain 

The Archbishop of York 
Dr. George F. Barbour, Scotland 
From the Orthodox Church 
Professor Georges Florovsky 
From the continent of Europe 

Professor S. F. H. J. Berkelbach van der Sprenkel, Hol¬ 
land 

Professor Jens Norregaard, Norway 
From America 

The Right Rev. George Craig Stewart 
President J. Ross Stevenson 

Here too alternates were named, as follows: 

Canon Leonard Hodgson 

Professor George S. Duncan 

Dean Ingve Brilioth 

Professor Bela Vasady 

Archimandrite Cassian 

Professor A. R. Wentz 

The Very Rev. George C. Pidgeon 

Let me now record some of the important points in the 
Edinburgh debate which resulted in the appointment of 
these seven representatives to carry on with the Oxford con¬ 
tingent. The text of the proposal had been before the con¬ 
ference for some time, and the all but unanimous favorable 
action of the Oxford Conference upon it had been widely 


166 World Chaos or World Christianity 

discussed; hence the Edinburgh delegates lost no time in 
launching into a careful debate of the proposal from the 
point of view of the Faith and Order movement. 

This movement is quite different in nature from the 
Universal Christian Council for Life and Work. The lat¬ 
ter, as its name implies, was created for united action in 
practical application of Christianity in social situations; 
the former was created for the sole purpose of exploring 
the ways to organic union of the churches. Despite the 
fact that both bodies derive their being and authority di¬ 
rectly from the churches, Life and Work has had a some¬ 
what less distinctively ecclesiastical status from a technical 
point of view. It was designed for cooperative action in a 
definite field of work, while Faith and Order was estab¬ 
lished for debate on one special problem: theology and 
church government. One movement inevitably had a good 
deal of contact with the nonecclesiastical world — govern¬ 
ments, secular movements, international organizations, 
and cultural institutions such as colleges and bodies de¬ 
voted to research in cognate fields; the other dealt exclu¬ 
sively with churches, through their official governments 
alone. 

Many spoke in support of the plan for a world council. 
Its chief opponent, Dr. Headlam, bishop of Gloucester, 
felt that if carried out it would endanger rather than ad¬ 
vance the work of Faith and Order, in which he frankly 
said he was exclusively interested. He feared that it would 
be impossible for a world council to refrain from action 
on social questions which for some might prove a difficulty 
and an embarrassment. He urged with eloquence and 
evident deep conviction that nothing be done to disturb 
the present organization of the ecumenical movement. 
Despite the fact that his views were shared by very few, 
the utmost courtesy and consideration were shown him 


Oxford and Edinburgh Act 167 

and perhaps the most hearty applause of the conference 
greeted him when he arose to put his case. I mention this 
incident as an indication of the spirit in which the work of 
the conference proceeded even when sharp differences 
emerged. 

If you refer to the quotations from the report of Section 
IV in the preceding chapter, you will note that the final 
recommendation has to do with the world council. You 
will recall that this section of the conference studied the 
problem of the steps next to be taken toward unity. In 
the opinion of the delegates who participated in the prep¬ 
aration of this report there was every reason to believe that 
the proposed council would further the cause of union by 
demonstrating the possibilities of unity. Dr. Mott, com¬ 
menting on the report, said that of all the findings this last 
was the most strategic. Through a world council alone 
would it be possible to carry out all the other recommenda¬ 
tions. He reminded the delegates that after the Edinburgh 
World Missionary Conference of 1910 twelve years were 
needed to work out a world organization of the mission 
boards and the churches in mission lands — the Interna¬ 
tional Missionary Council. Once it had been established, 
however, there developed a degree of unity in this great 
field of Christian activity such as had not been dreamed of 
when the process was begun. Even if it took as long — and 
he did not think it would— he felt that it was worth while 
to try to build up a comprehensive World Council of 
Churches to carry forward in a worthy manner the work 
done at the second Faith and Order and the second Life 
and Work conferences. 

Dr. William Adams Brown, who is president of the Uni¬ 
versal Christian Council on Life and Work and has also 
long been identified with the Faith and Order movement, 
spoke most emphatically in favor of the plan. He received 


168 World Chaos or World Christianity 

tremendous applause when at the conclusion of his re¬ 
marks he turned smilingly to the Bishop of Gloucester, who 
sat near him, with this appeal: “ If my old and dear friend, 
the Bishop of Gloucester, would help us to make this coun¬ 
cil the thing it ought to be, and to guard against the dangers 
which he thinks may be encountered, then he will meet a 
very deep feeling of expectation among the people of our 
churches and do a great service to the cause of Jesus Christ.” 

The Archbishop of York, meeting the various criticisms 
which had been made, called attention to the fact that when 
constituted the new council would have commissions for 
carrying forward the specific tasks of both the present move¬ 
ments. Thus persons not in the council could nevertheless 
be represented, as they are at present, in the individual 
undertakings, which would retain a degree of autonomy 
sufficient for the effective prosecution of their distinctive 
tasks. Such persons might also be appointed to commis¬ 
sions from church bodies which for any reason did not wish 
to adhere to the central body. 

He called attention to the interest shown by many in 
making the world council even more inclusive — i.e., by 
relating to it or possibly even including within it more of 
the present world Christian organizations, such as the 
World Alliance and the International Missionary Council 
— and pointed out that the responsible officers of these 
movements, none of which is constituted basically through 
the appointment of delegates by the churches as churches, 
had been consulted, that the closest possible relations with 
them would be maintained, and that the way was open 
for them to come into an associated relationship with the 
world council if they desired to do so. With a touch of 
humor he remarked that on the financial side the simpler 
form of organization ought to prove attractive, since it is 
always easier to present one cause than two to those who 


Oxford and Edinburgh Act 169 

are constantly being asked for funds to carry on the work 
of the church. 

On the whole, to those of us who have had long experi¬ 
ence with complex church organizations representing all 
the world, it seems little short of miraculous that practical 
unanimity was reached on this vital question at two such 
gatherings. It is worth pointing out that the only opposi¬ 
tion which appeared in the voting — three votes — came 
from one communion, the Anglican, whose numerous 
other delegates, including the two English primates, sup¬ 
ported the idea. As I mentioned when recording the vote 
of Oxford, even the leader of the opposition there changed 
his mind in view of certain modifications made in the plan 
by the Committee of Thirty-five, and voted affirmatively 
at Edinburgh. 

The special committee of sixty delegates which had been 
set up early in the conference under the chairmanship of 
Dr. J. Ross Stevenson, chairman of the American section 
of the Faith and Order movement, reported unanimously 
in favor of the plan, on the understanding that the follow¬ 
ing safeguards would be incorporated in the final pro¬ 
posals: 

(a) That the World Council’s commission on Faith and 
Order shall in the first instance be the continuation committee 
appointed by this conference. 

(b) In any further appointments made by the council to 
membership of the commission on Faith and Order the persons 
appointed shall always be members of the churches which fall 
within the terms of the Faith and Order invitation as addressed 
“ to all Christian bodies throughout the world which accept 
our Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour.” 

(c) The work of the commission on Faith and Order shall 
be carried on under the general care of a theological secretariat 
appointed by the commission in consultation with the council 
and acting in close cooperation with other secretariats of the 
council. The council shall make adequate financial provision 


170 World Chaos or World Christianity 

for the work of the commission after consultation with the 
commission. 

(d) In matters of common interest to all the churches and 
those pertaining to Faith and Order, the council shall always 
proceed in accordance with the basis on which this conference 
on Faith and Order was called and is being conducted. 

(e) The World Council shall consist of official representa¬ 
tives of the churches participating. 

The decision, as I have said, revealed only one negative 
vote cast at the time of the presentation of the report by 
Dr. Stevenson. 

Following the two conferences, the special provisional 
“ Committee of Fourteen ” met in London and organized, 
the Archbishop of York being chairman. They developed 
plans for carrying out the momentous mandate given them 
by the official action of the representatives of one hundred 
and twenty-two denominations of the Christian church 
throughout the world. Since the committee’s action is 
clearly provisional and depends upon the action taken by 
the denominations, they arranged to send a letter of invi¬ 
tation to all those churches now participating in the Life 
and Work or Faith and Order movements. 

A preliminary conference of official representatives of 
the churches is to convene in Holland in May, 1938, to 
draft a constitution for the world council. This group 
will likewise plan for the maintenance of the Universal 
Christian Council for Life and Work and the World Con¬ 
ference on Faith and Order in the period which must in¬ 
tervene before the new organization, which is to embrace 
them both, receives official authorization from the churches 
and is launched through the convening of the first general 
assembly. 

To make this provisional conference sufficiently rep¬ 
resentative without giving it unwieldy proportions is diffi¬ 
cult. So many communions are involved. But it has been 


Oxford and Edinburgh Act 171 

suggested that its membership be constituted as follows: 
Nine delegates from Great Britain; eighteen from the con¬ 
tinent of Europe; nine from the Eastern Orthodox 
churches; six from the younger churches (to be selected 
with the help of the International Missionary Council); 
six from Africa, Australasia and areas not otherwise rep¬ 
resented; and twelve from North America. The method 
of selection of the last group is to be worked out jointly by 
the American section of the Life and Work and Faith and 
Order movements. This would make a total of sixty per¬ 
sons — not too many for effective work. 

Thus is given an impressive answer to those who affirm 
that “ the churches never do anything but talk about unity; 
they do not try seriously to overcome their disastrous divi¬ 
sions.” Thus is opened a new chapter in Christian history. 
God grant that it may not be too late! 

As one looks back upon the Oxford and Edinburgh 
conferences the question naturally arises: What meaning 
and practical promise has all this for the church and the 
world? We have already agreed that the effectiveness of 
what was done cannot now be judged. The process of 
bringing to full expression such events is involved and 
far-reaching. The holding of these world conferences, 
however successfully, does not mean that the pagan forces 
of fascism and the atheistic antireligiousness of communism 
have been met and defeated — though to hear some en¬ 
thusiasts talk one might think that this is the case. 

But it does mean that the Christians of the world have 
won certain priceless advantages in their common struggle. 
The first of these — although it may seem strange to say it 
— is the simple fact that at Oxford and Edinburgh the out¬ 
standing leaders of the world’s churches met for intimate 
fellowship and personal acquaintance. It would be easy 


172 World Chaos or World Christianity 

to underestimate the importance of the fact. People talk 
about the futility of conferences, yet in the same breath 
they exclaim, “ Why don’t the Christians of the world get 
together! ” As if they could, merely by correspondence — 
Christians who live in sixty lands and use some hundreds 
of languages! Human limitations being what they are, 
the physical contact in friendly personal meeting, under the 
right conditions, of the people responsible for directing the 
work of the churches, is absolutely indispensable to com¬ 
plete spiritual meeting. There are of course many things 
today which bring together people from all parts of the 
world; but not often do so many from so great a number 
of nations stay together to think and work for a solid month. 
Still more seldom does it happen that their purpose is to 
find and understand the mind of Christ. When that is the 
objective — and it was — something very dynamic takes 
place, and seeds are sown which will surely bear fruit in 
unexpected ways through the years. 

The church come together in its representatives at Ox¬ 
ford and Edinburgh was definitely constructive, not apolo¬ 
getic, although it was duly humble and repentant for its 
failures in the past. It dug deep down to the foundations 
of its life and did not concern itself with superficial mat¬ 
ters. It stood before the world once more as affirming not 
a way, but the way of life — not ideals merely, but reality. 

Before the conferences met many said that the one would 
eclipse the other, or that one would seem like an anti¬ 
climax after the other. No such thing happened. As one 
very wise observer said afterwards: “ Instead of eclipsing 
Edinburgh, Oxford has vitalized it. By defining the task 
of the church in terms of Christianity’s social responsibility, 
Oxford has turned the church’s mind inward upon its own 
condition. ... It became clear that the church could 
not assume a functional responsibility of the magnitude 


Oxford and Edinburgh Act 173 

envisaged at Oxford while its faith and order were broken 
into sectarian compartments. ... A sectarian church 
could not mend the sectarianism of society.” 

The areas of agreement disclosed at Edinburgh may not 
seem significant to the superficial thinker or to the person 
unacquainted with the extent and rigidity of Christen¬ 
dom’s divisions. But to the historian or competent ob¬ 
server they will be full of tremendous significance for the 
future. Agreements like that reached concerning the mean¬ 
ing of grace are no mere incidents in the abstract debating of 
a few theological professors. They are signs of a new life 
in the church. The whole of the Christian gospel for a 
world of sin and selfishness and war is bound up with this 
concept of divine grace. No wonder the men who after 
careful and exhaustive debate drew up that agreement 
were moved to rise and sing at the end of their labors, 
“ Now thank we all our God! ” The church throughout 
the world may well re-echo those words. 

One feels disappointment over Edinburgh’s failure to 
come to a greater measure of agreement with regard to the 
conception of the church’s ministry and sacraments. But 
the areas of disagreement are now clearly defined, and are 
shown to be of such a character as not to hinder a vast in¬ 
crease in cooperative or federal unity even while they re¬ 
main a bar to organic unity. 

No student of the problem of the church in conflict with 
totalitarian states can fail to see the direct contribution 
which Oxford has made to the strengthening of Christian¬ 
ity at this crucial point. There still remain in every land 
those who are willing to compromise — and who do not 
see what that sort of compromise entails in the end — but 
against them now stands the witness of the representatives 
of the church throughout the world, declaring: Abso¬ 
lutely no! Compromise with the claims of the totalitarian 


174 World Chaos or World Christianity 

state can never be made to harmonize with recognition of 
the sovereignty of God or with the inclusiveness of the loy¬ 
alty of the Christian to his Lord. 

What was said at Oxford concerning the relation of the 
church and the economic order is of striking importance. 
In many parts of the church the danger has been that dis¬ 
content with the failures and shortcomings of one economic 
system would lead to complete identification of Chris¬ 
tianity with some other, presumably better, system. Ox¬ 
ford says through the declaration of its section in this field: 
“ Christianity can never be completely identified with any 
secular economic system. The tendency to identify some 
social or political utopia with the kingdom of God must be 
checked by the realization that the church preaches a differ¬ 
ent gospel. While it believes in and expects a juster order 
here on earth, and strives to realize it, it knows that com¬ 
plete realization of that ideal requires that it take into 
account the unseen world as well.” If its implications are 
understood and its relevance shown to men and women 
everywhere, that report will be a standard for the churches 
of the world for many generations to come. 

The same kind of significance attaches to the statements 
dealing with race, education, and war. They register new 
high levels for united Christian thinking. A few churches 
here and there have gone further than do these pronounce¬ 
ments. But never has there been any such universal agree¬ 
ment with respect to the crucial problems involved. Time 
will demonstrate, I firmly believe, that we have here some¬ 
thing of solid worth to the church of tomorrow. 

But beyond and behind all these deliverances, as a singu¬ 
larly moving element in the deeper life of both great 
councils, were certain spiritual attitudes. Humility and 
repentance, as I have intimated, were very evident. Men 
of such stature as the world calls great were led to agree in 


Oxford and Edinburgh Act 175 

the confession of the sins which have made the church weak 
in the face of a challenging world. Someone has said that 
the modern world has inverted the ancient adoration of 
the saints into inclination to confess the sins of its fore¬ 
fathers. But this mood I speak of was not one which as¬ 
signed blame; it accepted blame. Yet it was not defeatism, 
nor abject self-depreciation, nor despair. It was healthy 
and wholesome. Out of it grew willingness to recognize 
as never before the utter dependence of the creation upon 
the Creator, which led to a tremendous emphasis upon the 
sovereignty of God and the absolute lordship of his Son 
Jesus Christ. 

And hence arose confidence, and the mood of affirmation 
— not arrogant and self-assured, but indomitable, calm, 
and genuinely spiritual. There has always been lip-service 
of the idea that in Christ are the answers to the world’s 
need. It had become commonplace. But at Oxford and 
Edinburgh emerged a new understanding of that idea, an 
exhilarating realization that our Christianity is true! 
When one remembers the attempts to discount the reality 
of the gospel which have characterized recent years — with 
too much help at times from church leaders themselves — 
one appreciates that this is something to think about. 

Nor was this confidence based upon wishful thinking. 
It issued from a collective experience, vivid and convinc¬ 
ing, of the presence of God with power in his church and 
of his will that men regain and keep “ the unity of the faith 
in the bonds of peace.” No doubt remained in any mind 
but that the nearer we come to the great Head of the church 
the more strongly do we sense the reality of the oneness 
of that invisible church which is more than all the 
churches. In other words, there was given new evidence 
of the power common worship has to bring the broken 
family of God into vital fellowship. 


176 World Chaos or World Christianity 

As a consequence of their trust in God the conferences 
came to see clearly that our disintegrating world could be 
reintegrated by the unifying forces which God is prepared 
to release through a more united church. Christians have 
held the world together in the past. They could hold it 
together once more if they were ready to fulfill the condi¬ 
tions imposed by the very nature of the task. That the 
delegates came to the conference talking about their 
churches and went away talking about the Church is a sign 
that they had seen this vision and had committed them¬ 
selves to realizing it. 

The unity actually gained was unity of attitude — and 
unity of attitude is most important, because it must be won 
before any other kind of unity can really be achieved. It 
is not intellectual primarily, although of course there are 
intellectual elements in it; but rather it is something which 
engages a man’s will and spirit and transcends his ordinary 
reasoning processes. It is a sort of spiritual instinct mani¬ 
festing itself in the whole orientation of personality and 
life, both individual and social. If you ask for an illustra¬ 
tion of this unity of attitude I would remind you of the 
agreement unexpectedly reached at both conferences with 
regard to the policy and doctrine of the church. Look 
once again at Oxford’s Message and Edinburgh’s Affirma¬ 
tion of Unity. No stranger from another planet, had he 
attended the closing session of either conference, would 
have felt that there were any fundamental differences 
among the participating churches. He would have found 
in the general approach to all questions — those on which 
there were differences as well as those on which complete 
agreement was reached — that brotherliness and common¬ 
alty of interest which are the sign and seal not of uniformity 
but of true unity. 

But in both councils there was also a consciousness of 


Oxford and Edinburgh Act 177 

imminent danger, though it appeared more clearly at Ox¬ 
ford than at Edinburgh. The sense of dependence on God 
did not dull the sense of human responsibility and mission. 
Indolence, indifference, procrastination, halfheartedness, 
were seen as sins in the life of the church, barriers to the 
flow of divine impulses in the life of mankind. More than 
one discerning leader of the church spoke a warning: 

“ Christians, unite or perish! ” 

With this warning ringing in their ears the delegates 
made provision for constant correlation of world-wide 
Christian activity and for promotion of unity in the organic 
and spiritual life of the churches. At no other ecclesiasti¬ 
cal world gathering in modern times, save possibly at Edin- * 
burgh in 1910, has so much thoughtful and prayerful con¬ 
sideration been given this vital necessity. The unexpected 
willingness on the part of the delegates to be concrete and 
practical was not a sign of abandonment of things spiritual, 
but rather a convincing evidence of the realism with which 
they faced the conditions of the life of the spirit in the 
world of men. For the physical body of man the Lord gives 
daily bread. For the physical body of the church provision 
must also be made — by securing for it what will build it 
up in new unity and renewed creativeness. 

The conspicuous cooperation of lay men and women in 
the thought processes leading up to Oxford in particular, 
and the readiness of many of the world’s most distinguished 
thinkers in university, economic, and government circles 
to take their stand uncompromisingly with the church, 
were factors of no mean importance in the success of both 
conferences. Such a thing has not happened in modern 
times on the same scale. It seems to promise a new day 
when so-called “ intellectuals,” at least in democratic lands, 
will put their efforts into strengthening the forces of Chris¬ 
tian enlightenment and liberty instead of ignoring or 


iy8 World Chaos or World Christianity 

opposing them, as even the nominal churchmen among 
scholars and writers have too often done in recent years. 

These facts should not be forgotten. Too long has it 
been assumed that the making of the church of tomorrow is 
the task of the clergy alone. Now once more, as in the days 
of the early church, it is clearly seen that unless and until 
lay responsibility is recognized and lay cooperation en¬ 
couraged there can be no real progress in the renewing of 
the life of the church or — even more important — in the 
increase of its impact upon the hostile elements in the 
social and international orders. 

As for the youth representatives of many lands who were 
officially present at the councils of their elders, by their own 
testimony they were enabled to understand as never before 
why the world-wide expression of Christianity requires the 
church and what it can hope to accomplish if it is prepared 
to accept God’s plan for its unified development. These 
young men and women worked together through many 
patient weeks in the preparation of plans for the first world¬ 
wide church youth conference to be held in 1939 in Am¬ 
sterdam, Holland, under the auspices of the World Alliance 
for Friendship through the Churches, of other ecumenical 
organizations in special areas, such as student work, the 
Sunday school, and the Christian associations, and of the 
organization that will by then doubtless have been con¬ 
stituted as the World Council of Churches. 

Still another element of new and real import in the two 
conferences was the relationship developed between them 
and the world missionary enterprise. Logically, of course, 
all these movements are inseparable. But in the past 
there has been all too wide a gulf between them. How 
different the situation now! At both conferences the 
International Missionary Council — born, you will re- 


Oxford and Edinburgh Act 179 

member, at Edinburgh in 1910 — was conspicuously repre¬ 
sented through such of its leaders as John R. Mott, J. H. 
Oldham, William Paton, A. L. Warnshuis, and many of 
their associates from East and West. The conferences kept 
constantly in mind the significance of their work for the 
International Missionary Council’s next meeting, which 
is to be held in India in 1938, thanks to Japan’s war against 
China, which makes it impossible for the meeting to con¬ 
vene at Hangchow, as originally planned. It seems safe to 
predict that once the World Council of Churches is or¬ 
ganized one of its first steps will be to establish intimate 
connections with this council. 

Another accomplishment of the conferences was the 
setting up of new plans for the education of the ministry 
of the future in ways that will enormously increase their 
sensitiveness to the need of overcoming sectionalism, de- 
nominationalism, and nationalism in a world Christianity 
of dynamic, growing power. 

Again, the activity centering in the conferences has 
brought forth a number of painstaking studies in fields of 
intense interest and common concern — studies made not 
by individuals working singly, or by denominations, or 
even by national groups, but by the ablest Christian minds 
of all the world working together under a concerted plan 
toward a single purpose. That such literature has never 
before existed — save in the field of foreign missions — 
everyone is aware. For those in every land who desire 
to know what the best Christian thought of the age has to 
say about the fundamental relationships of society and the 
duties of the individual who would play his part in build¬ 
ing a better world, the conferences have provided a store 
of wisdom not likely soon to be surpassed either in sound¬ 
ness or in relevance to life. 


180 World Chaos or World Christianity 

Finally, the chancellories of Europe, the universities, 
newspaper offices and radio broadcasting centers, have 
given evidence of new stirrings of interest in a Christianity 
which by many signs shows that it is awakening to the im¬ 
portance of a kind of unity which it has not possessed for 
centuries. The ether waves, the cables and the press have 
carried to waiting millions words fraught with new prom¬ 
ise, new hope, new ideas, all centered in the one hope of the 
world for fellowship and justice and peace — the Lord 
Jesus Christ. 

But the real answer to the question, What will these 
conferences accomplish? will be given by individual Chris¬ 
tians. The pronouncements of Oxford and Edinburgh 
will be of avail to a sick world only if there are enough 
men and women who take them seriously and apply their 
lessons. Such men and women will find ways to make plain 
their concern for greater unity. They will cease to stress 
such terms as “ Presbyterian,” “ Baptist,” “ Congrega¬ 
tional,” “ Methodist,” “ Episcopalian,” “ Lutheran,” and 
remember that Christ’s followers, of whatever denomina¬ 
tional family, are first of all Christians. They will not leave 
it all to committees or commissions. They will not be 
content to see things stand still as they are. They will press 
for action and yet more action, never scorning a forward 
step, no matter how short, never allowing themselves to be 
reconciled to anything less than complete unity among 
Christians. 

Thus they will not fail to recognize in their brethren 
of like purpose, no matter where found, fellow helpers 
toward the truth and fellow heirs of the kingdom which is 
God’s gift — to be received on earth in its fullness only 
when from east and west, north and south, from among the 
young and the old, the rich and the poor, the learned 


Oxford and Edinburgh Act 181 

and the unlettered, there come to appropriate its blessings 
earnest souls in whom has dawned “ the light of the knowl¬ 
edge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ ” and in 
whom Christ’s prayer “ that they all may be one ” finds its 
answer. 









































\ 




I 
























































library of congress 




























































































































































































































